Tag Archives: nomination

Yes, that Ed Martin (r)

01 Tuesday Apr 2025

Posted by in US Senate

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Today:

April 1, 2025
STATEMENT: Sen. Schiff Announces Hold on D.C. U.S. Attorney Nominee Ed Martin

Washington, D.C. — Today, Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, announced he would be placing a hold on the nomination of Edward Martin to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, citing Mr. Martin’s troubling conduct in his months as Interim U.S. Attorney in the same role.

“In every way he can, Ed Martin has demolished the firewalls between the White House and his own office within the Department of Justice. Confirming him to serve permanently in the role he has already abused in his interim capacity would cross the prosecutorial Rubicon that every single Senator would come to regret and that would threaten the rights of Americans from all walks of life.

“For the past nine weeks, Ed Martin has consistently undermined the independence and abused the power of the U.S. Attorney’s office in DC – openly threatening and intimidating political opponents, dismissing charges against his own clients, firing public servants for their roles in legitimate investigations, and using his office as a cudgel to chill dissent and free speech.

“No one embodies Donald Trump’s personal weaponization of the Justice Department more than Ed Martin. He is unfit to serve as a lawyer, let alone one with the resources – and cover from the Senate – to further twist the power of the law and law enforcement to go after Americans who stand up for the rule of law and for our democracy. With all of the power I am afforded as a United States Senator, I intend to place a hold on his nomination and block attempts to jam through his appointment at every stage.”

###

Too bad, so sad.

Previously:

Scott Eckersley and Matt “baby” Blunt: there’s a lawsuit in here somewhere (January 11, 2008)

Ed Martin (r): proof that we never get out of junior high school (May 7, 2012)

Ed Martin (r): We were sitting around trying to think of a metaphor for the campaign… (June 16, 2012)

A Yale law degree doesn’t have much of a cachet these days…

18 Friday Mar 2022

Posted by in Josh Hawley, social media, US Senate

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Today:

ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary rates Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson “Well Qualified”

WASHINGTON, March 18, 2022 — The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has completed its evaluation of the professional qualifications of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Biden’s nominee to the United States Supreme Court, and has given her a unanimous rating of “Well Qualified.”

The Standing Committee confines its evaluation to the qualities of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. The Honorable Ann Claire Williams (Ret.), chair of the ABA’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, is scheduled to testify about the rating before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday, March 24.
[….]

Harvard Law, 1996.

The American Bar Association letter:

Meanwhile, from Virginia:

Senator Hawley Press Office @SenHawleyPress
“I think we just have a basic question to ask: Are we going to get a judge here who’s going to protect children or who’s going to protect child predators? It’s a simple question,” says Senator Hawley.
[….]
1:38 PM · Mar 18, 2022

Some of the comments:

I think we just have a basic question to ask: Are we going to allow a US Senator to slander the record of a sitting judge and to support the January 6th insurrection? It’s a simple question.

Why do we have insurrectionists in congress? It’s a simple question.

Why did Joshie endorse a child abuser for senate? It’s a simple question.

Why did Joshie use his sisters address to vote in 2020? It’s a simple question.

I think the residents of Missouri have a basic question to ask. Are you Josh Hawley a resident of the state of Missouri?

I think the residents of Missouri have a basic question to ask. Are you Josh Hawley a resident of the state of Missouri?

Just because you can phrase your demagoguery in simple terms doesn’t mean it’s not inherently dishonest.

You have no integrity.

#ResignHawley

Quit lying you fascist piece of shit

Don’t hold back. Tell us all how you really feel.

From what I’ve read, Josh, the judge followed recommendations of the sentencing board. Only 30% of cases follow the sentencing of non producing charges. The other 70% are lower which is what was recommended. You sir are a liar and an attention grabber. Nobody on Fox will explain

Josh Hawley (r) [2016 file photo].

Previously:

Senator Claire McCaskill (D) – town hall in Warrensburg – Press Q and A – August 17, 2017 (August 17, 2017)

Erasure

19 Wednesday Feb 2020

Posted by in media criticism, Resist, social media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Former Senator Claire McCaskill (D) [2018 file photo].

This morning, after their polling and reporting yesterday evening erased Elizabeth Warren (D):

Claire McCaskill @clairecmc
This is going to be interesting. Bloomberg on the debate stage tonight. Tune in and join us for pre debate and post debate analysis. @msnbc @BWilliams @NicolleDWallace
6:46 AM · Feb 19, 2020

I just had to respond:

Michael Bersin
So, is the pre debate analysis going to erase @ewarren? Is the debate coverage going to pixelate her face and mute any of her responses? Just curious.
6:50 AM · Feb 19, 2020

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) [2019 file photo].

#PresidentWarren it is

17 Monday Feb 2020

Posted by in media criticism, meta

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) [2019 file photo].

I hate meta. And yet, here we have it.

We are an impatient people. We watch impatient old media. They create narratives because they are impatient. We listen to those tired narratives because we are so predictably impatient.

The old media hand wringing on the evening of the Iowa Caucus was a thing to behold. I spent my time watching their coverage screaming obscenities at the onscreen talking heads throughout the night. You’d have thought the cable networks had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on their brand new sets and on their ominous, yet vaguely patriotic, “Decide Something 2020” theme music. Instead, we got a really bad remake of the 1970 Mary Tyler Moore Show election night blizzard episode “The Snow Must Go On”. Watch the original, it’s hilarious.

Old media had to wait, what, seventy-two hours, for an approximation of the final results of a CAUCUS, the first voting event in a line of fifty-seven or so (states, commonwealths, territories). They wanted to declare an ultimate winner THAT VERY NIGHT. How dare the Iowa Democratic Party hold a caucus like that. You know, with (very public) formulas and arcane rules. Yawn.

If you’ve ever participated in a caucus they’re all like that. [Raises hand: Missouri, 1992.] Forget that it took months for an “official winner” of the Iowa republican caucus several cycles back.

The 2020 Iowa Caucus was the best thing to happen to presidential politics in America in a long time. Maybe 2020 will be a final stake in the heart of this money sucking, faux populist, abomination of true Democracy.

Caucuses are inherently undemocratic while simultaneously being small “d” democratic. You can’t “vote” at will over a period of your choosing in the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on the day of the caucus. You have to show up before they figuratively “lock the doors” at the appointed hour and then you have to stay for the duration to have your vote counted. Who does this cockamamie process exclude? I’ll wait.

Candidates spent tens of millions in Iowa. Several campaigns, with stellar candidates, ran out of resources and the approval of conventional wisdom long before the first vote was cast. That’s a tragedy for all of us. The candidates spent tens of millions of dollars in Iowa. Think about that.

It’s on us because we let this happen, election after election.

There’s a lot to be said for retail politics, the art and charm of presidential candidates getting out there and engaging voters one on one. Get over it. You don’t live there. There are a lot of Americans who don’t get that opportunity to engage with candidates who want to be their president, because somehow we’ve anointed two small states with a tiny percentage of voters (and low turnout) and with a minimal number of nominating delegates at stake to act as the final arbiters and gatekeepers of our viable and/or electable candidates for president.

Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Julián Castro, to name a few, are no longer candidates. Tulsi Gabbard hangs on, still. I rest my case.

Senator Kamala Harris (D) [2019 file photo].

Senator Cory Booker (D) [2019 file photo]

Former HUD Secretary Julián Castro (D) [2019 file photo].

So, here we are, with eight or so candidates remaining in the Democratic Party presidential nominating process and old media chomping at the bit to create winners and losers narratives. The next two components of the process include another arcane caucus and an honest to goodness primary. We’ll see what happens. Old media will lazily build on their previous narratives or gaslight us all if they change them. Then it’s fifty-three or so primaries or caucuses to go. Get my drift?

In the meantime, a trend on social media:

Adam Best @adamcbest
#PresidentWarren is trending because despite her being 3rd in delegates, 3rd in most national polls and 2nd in endorsements, the media acts as if she doesn’t exist. So her supporters are dealing with this blackout by making sure voters know she’s still here and still kicking ass.
3:40 PM · Feb 17, 2020

#PresidentWarren

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) [2019 file photo].

President Obama: on the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court

20 Sunday Mar 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

President Obama’s weekly address:

The White House transcript:

Remarks of President Barack Obama as Delivered
Weekly Address
The White House
​March 19, 2016

Hi, everybody. One of the most consequential responsibilities our Constitution grants a President is appointing a Supreme Court Justice. The men and women who sit on the Supreme Court safeguard our rights. They ensure that ours is a system of laws, not of men. And they’re given the essential task of applying the principles written into our founding documents to the most challenging questions of today.

So this is a duty I take very seriously. It requires me to set aside short-term politics in order to maintain faith with our founders. And on Wednesday, after weeks of consultations with Republicans, Democrats, and leaders across the country, I selected a nominee whose unmatched experience and integrity have earned him the respect and admiration of both parties – Chief Judge Merrick Garland.

Judge Garland grew up in my hometown of Chicago, with parents who taught him to work hard and deal fairly. As a young lawyer, he left a lucrative private firm to work for half as much in public service. Eventually, he oversaw the federal response to the Oklahoma City bombing, working side-by-side with first responders, victims, and their families to bring justice for an unspeakable crime. And everywhere he went during that investigation, he carried with him in his briefcase the program from the memorial service with each of the victims’ names inside.

For the last 19 years, Judge Garland has served on what’s known as “the second highest court in the land” – the D.C. Circuit Court – including the last three years as Chief Judge. On the bench, he’s shown a dedication to protecting our basic rights. A conviction that powerful voices must not be allowed to drown out those of everyday Americans. An understanding that justice isn’t simply abstract legal theory; it affects people’s daily lives. And a spirit of decency, modesty, and even-handedness in his work. Judge Garland is admired for his courtesy, his devotion to family, and his civic-mindedness – for the past 18 years, he’s served as a tutor for young students at a local D.C. elementary school.

During my time as President, through three separate Supreme Court appointments, in conversations with Republicans and Democrats alike, one name came up more than any other – Merrick Garland.

I understand that we’re in the middle of an especially noisy and volatile political season. But at a time when our politics are so polarized; when norms and customs of our political rhetoric seem to be corroding – this is precisely the time we should treat the appointment of a Supreme Court justice with the seriousness it deserves. Because our Supreme Court is supposed to be above politics, not an extension of politics. And it should stay that way.

So I ask Republicans in the Senate to give Judge Garland the respect he has earned. Give him a hearing. Give him an up-or-down vote. To deny it would be an abdication of the Senate’s Constitutional duty. It would indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair. It would make it increasingly impossible for any President, Republican or Democrat, to carry out their Constitutional function. To go down that path would jeopardize our system of justice, it would hurt our democracy, and betray the vision of our founding.

I fulfilled my Constitutional duty. Now it’s time for Senators to do theirs. I hope that they take the time to reflect on the importance of this process to our country. I hope that they’ll act fairly. And I hope they’ll work in a bipartisan fashion to confirm Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. That’s how we can uphold our pledge to liberty and justice for all – for our time and for generations to come.

Thanks everybody. Have a good weekend.

###

“…I fulfilled my Constitutional duty. Now it’s time for Senators to do theirs…”

We’re not entirely convinced that Senator Roy Blunt (r) is listening.

Previously:

Originalism in a time of argle-bargle (February 14, 2016)

Jason Kander (D): the Supreme Court and Roy Blunt (r) (February 15, 2016)

Sen. Roy Blunt (r): can’t be bothered to even attempt to appear to do his job (February 23, 2016)

Jason Kander (D) to Roy Blunt (r): #DoYourJob (February 25, 2016)

Tell Roy Blunt to do his job (March 4, 2016)

Sen. Roy Blunt (r) won’t do his job and the sun also rises (March 17, 2016)