Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumTrump judicial nominee can't answer basic questions
Loyalty to the Supreme Leader trumps country, rule of law, and justice.
Dec 15, 2017
Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) questions Matthew Spencer Petersen, President Trump's nominee for district court judge, about his lack of experience trying cases in court.
Link to tweet
Trumps Judge Pick Denied
Dec 14, 2017
A potential sign of Trumps political power eroding in the wake of Alabama loss, his picks for federal bench struck down.
Glorfindel
(9,733 posts)trusty elf
(7,401 posts)Docreed2003
(16,875 posts)I couldnt imagine being so unqualified for a position and sit there and try to justify my appointment...thats ridiculous. Pretty sure Ive got as many qualifications to be a judge as that dude does!
olegramps
(8,200 posts)pazzyanne
(6,556 posts)makes me feel hopeful that sanity and truth may once again become part of the nomination process in filling government vacancies. We have had enough of the unqualified trying to run our government!
rsdsharp
(9,197 posts)1. The nominee is conservative. Preferably far right.
2. The nominee is young and can serve 30-40 years.
3. Ideally, the nominee is personally loyal to Trump.
Whether they've ever drafted or argued a motion, taken a deposition, tried a case, argued an appeal, have looked at the Federal Rules at anytime within the last 15 years, or ever even set foot in a courtroom is irrelevant to Donnie Dumbfuck.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,176 posts)One of the best names I've heard. And one of the most accurate.
DFW
(54,436 posts)Bannon must still be searching out the worst names he can come up with and is sending them to Trump z
to get them confirmed as fast as he can. Stealth erosion of our judicial system.
marble falls
(57,204 posts)to run out a five minute clock without directly answering yes or no questions.
If he has any shame whatsoever he will remove himself from consideration. Its not like Kennedy is a liberal or a Democrat with an "agenda".
I hope Rachel talks about this on her show tonight.
brush
(53,847 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)is not that big a deal for the appointment of judges. For trial courts it may be more important but not for appellate courts who do no trials and are more intellectual. Often professors of law or seasoned commercial lawyers are appointed as all kind of skills are needed on appellate courts, including just having the experience and wisdom of living a longer life.
But these two clowns are barely out of law school and have little experience nice in law or life.
Picked by the Federalist Society because they were young foaming at the mouth evangelical quality followers. We should all be afraid of these fascists and keep an eye on them.
PS-is the clueless headed one actually getting a floor vote?!
Where is the corporate media big 3 on this?
dpibel
(2,852 posts)This guy is up for district court, not court of appeals. So he'd be running trials, and experience matters.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)disqualifing alone.
treestar
(82,383 posts)with the case law that deals with laws of evidence and procedure, but not strictly necessary, since as judge he could read the briefs and learn that law as well an anyone else could learn another area within the field. And you get the law from the lawyers who are arguing the point.
mobeau69
(11,156 posts)He's a joke of a nominee nominated by a joke of an administration. This is painful to watch.
FDT
BobTheSubgenius
(11,564 posts)Maybe "they" think they have all kinds of time to get this done, and they are just trying to wear the committee down with awful candidates. Their plan could be that, in the near future, a law degree and a promise that the candidate has never flung their own feces around a courtroom will be Good Enough.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)He's relied on Cliff's Notes all his life, and bullshits his way through everything.
Cattledog
(5,919 posts)HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)I have never filed a Motion in Limine. I am not a litigator. But Jesus Christ, I know what one is from going to law school over 30 years ago. That is about as basic as it gets.
I guess I am qualified to receive a judicial appointment from Trump. Where do I apply??
Cheviteau
(383 posts)That would be the 2nd door on the right as you enter. Tell'em Vlad sent you.
keithbvadu2
(36,906 posts)Can I be a judge?
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)Then your overqualified.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)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. He served as Chairman for 2010 and 2016.
From 2005 until his appointment to the FEC, Petersen served as Republican chief counsel to the United States Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. Prior, Petersen served as counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House Administration. During his tenure, Petersen was involved in the crafting of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) and the HouseSenate negotiations that culminated in HAVA's passage. From 1999 to 2002, Petersen practiced election and campaign finance law at Wiley Rein LLP in Washington, D.C.
wiki
weydowner
(100 posts)From what I see, dozens and dozens of members of this pathetic administration have about the same knowledge of their departments or specialities. (ie none). It makes me wonder how this particular idiot has been made the Red Meat of the Day.
To just think of 2 names - Betsy DeVos and Ben Carson - they were just as ignorant and unqualified as this character, sharing with him that repugnant arrogance, yet they seemed to sail through their questioning. Doubtless there are dozens more of these examples.
If Trump had had a 'good week', the news would have been different, and Queen Omaroso would have been strutting along the Corridors of Power instead of sitting on the outside,plotting her new book.
Bread and Circuses.
forgotmylogin
(7,530 posts)"I know...there should be school. I believe...it should have...walls. And...roof..."
TomSlick
(11,109 posts)I would expect any first year law student to be able to answer these questions.
A district judge is expected to preside over trials with competent lawyers. There will necessarily be complex legal issues with both lawyers completely convinced they are correct. This poor guy will not have a clue. Other than it's a life time gig, he really shouldn't want the job.
It occurs to me that there is a world of very conservative lawyers who are perfectly competent. There are bound to be several in every federal court district in America. Why is Trump nominating people who will necessarily embarrass themselves? If I was the President and my party controlled the Senate, I would nominate liberal lawyers who would not embarrass themselves and me at a confirmation hearing and - more importantly - could be competent and effective judges.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,836 posts)This is where Manafort and others involved in the Russia investigation will be tried.
I was wondering why such a clearly unqualified person was nominated for the position, but it all makes sense now.
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,836 posts)are you too paranoid; it's, are you paranoid enough?
Doreen
(11,686 posts)Marcuse
(7,506 posts)No need for Senate confirmation.
radhika
(1,008 posts)Day in, day out, going viral, international. He didn't even try to bone up by skimming Law School for Dummies. It will follow him to his grave. His heirs will see where their DNA came from.
If worse comes to worse for America in the Trump debacle, he'll be a textbook case for the collapse. If we turn things around, he can compete with so many other Trumpsters for the position of Rock Bottom.
treestar
(82,383 posts)is the likely last time he knew more about them) and the lawyers would brief him on all of that. All judges have to be able to adapt to new areas, especially in civil courts, where the case could be about anything. IMO the questioner believes that trial lawyers are a better fit since they have already been in court dealing with evidence and procedure law.
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)Rainbow Droid
(722 posts)And don't flame me until you've read it all...
https://www.popehat.com/2017/12/15/i-have-almost-nothing-bad-to-say-about-matthew-spencer-petersen/
I don't agree with him about everything, but I do on this particular subject.