- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: John Kennedy grills trump federal judge nominee
Posted on 12/15/17 at 12:48 pm to CorporateTiger
Posted on 12/15/17 at 12:48 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
I mean still you can’t come up with anything to say about Daubert?
Do I know you sir? If so, you have me at a disadvantage.
0
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:09 pm to Bison
Kennedy - Please keep publicly shite-ing on Trump's judicial nominees. It will make you extremely popular in LA.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:16 pm to Rock the Casbah
He's very warranted in shutting on this guy, I don't understand his bone to pick with Duncan.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:18 pm to NIH
quote:
I don't understand his bone to pick with Duncan.
If you read between the lines on what he's saying (Duncan's nothing but a "Washington lawyer!"), it seems clear that Kennedy has a more "local" crony that he'd prefer get the nod there.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:20 pm to Y.A. Tittle
100%
He loves playing up the good ole baw angle when it suits him
He loves playing up the good ole baw angle when it suits him
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:20 pm to NIH
quote:
I don't understand his bone to pick with Duncan.
Seems like he's being petty since he didn't get his say-so in the nomination.
And this guy was bad, I'm glad Kennedy took it to him.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:22 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
I’m generally anti-Trump, but this shite has very little to do with him. These are bulk appointments for the most part. In many cases the state Senators have more influence on the selection than Trump.
I agree. However he ever got to that position is disheartening. This is a prime example of the 'Peter Principle' x 100.
This post was edited on 12/15/17 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:23 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Prior to being named solicitor general in 2009, Elena Kagan...
Besides all the good reasons mentioned above, Antonin Scalia personally recommended her.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:27 pm to monceaux
Either being a prior litigator matters or it doesn't. I am not saying he is a great pick. I am not saying Kagan was a bad pick. I am saying someone who never litigated and has been out of law school for a long time is not dumb for not recognizing the terms in the questions. I also don't think picking someone without litigation experience, but with an otherwise impressive legal resume is lazy.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:41 pm to Freder
quote:
But, I’m sure this is some 3D chess move by Trump to.. I don’t know.. do something... frick if I know.
MAGA
It's scary if you think this way. This was more than likely just a nomination for an empty seat of a guy who has a good legal background and is owed a favor, but has no business being a district court judge.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 1:49 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
or even so much as argued a motion in any court (basically he's never SET FOOT in a courtroom as a lawyer)
Posted on 12/15/17 at 2:12 pm to LSURussian
Yeah, he's got that dude beat. 
Posted on 12/15/17 at 2:13 pm to Iosh
quote:
Delete this nephew
Uncle Iosh?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 3:17 pm to theronswanson
if you want to understand what a bad idea nominating this guy is, just imagine an NFL game refereed by a guy the NFL hired who'd never been to a football game, never watched a football game, read the rulebook only once years ago, and was totally unfamiliar with the concepts of false start, offsides, holding, touchdowns, etc. and how they applied in context. and imagine that every decision that referee made could cost someone millions of dollars, their business, or their liberty.
we're talking the USDC for the D.C. Circuit, the most important division in the U.S.
and this is the guy you want hearing your case?
no...frick no.
we're talking the USDC for the D.C. Circuit, the most important division in the U.S.
and this is the guy you want hearing your case?
no...frick no.
This post was edited on 12/15/17 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 12/15/17 at 3:23 pm to Freder
quote:
The fact that this guy even got a confirmation hearing in the first place?
It wasn't a confirmation hearing, just a committee hearing. The committee can still refuse to hold hearings. Orrin Hatch did it to Kagan when Clinton nominated her for a federal judge position, and of course we know what Grassley did with Garland.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 3:25 pm to CorporateTiger
I doubt they had any that were this lacking in court experience or this lacking in prep for their hearing.
You've go the big old ww web to find us links, though.
You've go the big old ww web to find us links, though.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 5:33 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Either being a prior litigator matters or it doesn't. I am not saying he is a great pick. I am not saying Kagan was a bad pick. I am saying someone who never litigated and has been out of law school for a long time is not dumb for not recognizing the terms in the questions. I also don't think picking someone without litigation experience, but with an otherwise impressive legal resume is lazy
Solicitor General and District Court judge are two different worlds. Arguably Petersen would be far more qualified to be SG.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 5:35 pm to 8thyearsenior
quote:
Obama isn't president anymore so stop melting about him.
Obama was inexperienced and should never of been president.
Page 4 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News