- Reaction score
- 1,145
- Points
- 1,060
FJAG: I read those reports and more than less looked at the persons comments -on average- that were interviewed and complained. A record of anti-Bush (primarily Academic) commentary that ran completely counter to the judicial history of the man. In particular, he had been sceptical and challenging on de novo cases for which there was already an existing remedy. And yes, he did not consider the state as an untrustable enemy of the people.
Still, I don’t think he should get the nod, his testimony was confrontational, he chose words poorly, and opened himself up to inquiry that was self inflicted and I wonder just how many beers each week he really consumes. More than the average judge, apparently.
It may well be that from this past week forward there will never be a judge that is “ good enough”,but in this case he’s just not credible due to claims outside of the sexual misconduct allegations.
Still, I don’t think he should get the nod, his testimony was confrontational, he chose words poorly, and opened himself up to inquiry that was self inflicted and I wonder just how many beers each week he really consumes. More than the average judge, apparently.
It may well be that from this past week forward there will never be a judge that is “ good enough”,but in this case he’s just not credible due to claims outside of the sexual misconduct allegations.