General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPlease don't ask Luttig anything else. Just ask Keebler Elf Guy.
Luttig comes off like Mueller did in his final interview. Not all there.
SheilaAnn
(9,694 posts)Peregrine Took
(7,413 posts)Haggis 4 Breakfast
(1,454 posts)who cannot wrap their minds around that WHAT he is saying is far more important that HOW it comes out.
LISTEN TO HIS WORDS.
This man is a one of the MOST repected judges in the US today. He was (top of the) short-list for SCOTUS, but the trumpies knew that he tolerates NO misinterpretation or re-imagining of the Constitution. He does not tolerate fools. He is a brilliant legal and Constitutional scholar, with very few peers at his level. Glenn Kirscher has spoken about Michael Luttig in the most reverent of terms.
For those who cannot follow a speaker who doesn't speak in soundbites, or flashy commentary, welcome to the world of legal scholarship at the highest level.
Try to keep up.
Ilsa
(61,694 posts)for a speech impediment, such as stuttering. I enjoyed hearing what he had to say. I just wish the Rs would finally take this seriously and throw trump to the wolves. Or out of a window.
iemanja
(53,032 posts)So you are muting away evidence.
frogmarch
(12,153 posts)LymphocyteLover
(5,644 posts)If they need to ask Luttig anything, just yes or no questions.
sop
(10,167 posts)Ocelot II
(115,683 posts)Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)Siwsan
(26,260 posts)PatSeg
(47,419 posts)but thought that was odd for a federal judge. Perhaps he did have a stroke at one time. I really feel for him as he seems so uncomfortable.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)before he just blurts them out. Would you rather a 90 to nothing word salad?
Haggis 4 Breakfast
(1,454 posts)But no actual facts have been available.
Response to Siwsan (Reply #7)
Haggis 4 Breakfast This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ocelot II
(115,683 posts)sop
(10,167 posts)50 Shades Of Blue
(9,983 posts)Seriously though, I think he's invaluable as a witness. Eastman clerked for him.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)It pains him to condemn a fellow "republican", but he knows he has to do it.
Imagine a parent testifying to send a child away to prison. He's being particular and plain. Showing no effectuation.
mahina
(17,647 posts)I hope hes ok.
Baitball Blogger
(46,703 posts)But he knows it's the right thing to do. Maybe the perfect example of the old meaning of ambivalent.
txwhitedove
(3,928 posts)Former Federal judge doesn't miss a beat on rapid fire questions.
cilla4progress
(24,728 posts)Clerk, Eastman.
I think he is just shocked..never thought it could come to this.
Suffers from a failure of imagination..
SMDH
woodsprite
(11,913 posts)inthewind21
(4,616 posts)Maybe a Rudy 90 to nothing word salad would suit you better?
txwhitedove
(3,928 posts)woodsprite
(11,913 posts)Ocelot II
(115,683 posts)He's talking faster now; maybe he's just running on an older OS that takes awhile to boot up.
Now he's explaining how Eastman, et al. tried to take advantage of the wording of the 12th Amendment to enable Pence to decide the election. "Constitutional mischief," he said.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,109 posts)Him what the Democratic slang word used by democratic politicians and lawyers is for Republicans.
And when he has no answer ask him to politely start calling the Democratic people by the proper name.
I might be talking about a different person I am only listening not watching Im talking about the person who purposely said democRAT
dchill
(38,481 posts)Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)Every comedian on that show would be begging to play Luttig.
yorkster
(1,490 posts)I think Luttig is a slow and thoughtful speaker, aware of gravity of the situation, etc.
I have to admit, though, that I would definitely tune in for a cold open based on Messrs. Luttig, Jacob et al at today's hearing.
Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)Bucky
(53,998 posts)Better Days Ahoy
(698 posts)Plodding, uninteresting, excruciatingly slow. Hard to remember the first part of each sentence as he crawls toward the end of each comment. Reminds me of an international studies professor who really should have retired 10 years earlier.
The panel must have amazing facial expression control as he slow-walks his explanation. Good thing that they're not showing them during his testimony.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)the first part of the sentence? That speaks more about you than him.
Better Days Ahoy
(698 posts)... I have to agree with you. I read a later post that Luttig, SCOTUS runner-up to Alito, was aiming his remarks at the current SCOTUS members should they be tempted to rule stupidity on this topic.
Judge Luttig's final comments took my breath away. Respect. I should take down my initial comment as it wasn't fair to him.
Scottie Mom
(5,812 posts)He should have never been a witness.
iemanja
(53,032 posts)Maybe they should have George Clooney as a stand it and read for him. JFC.
Scottie Mom
(5,812 posts)Perhaps you missed them.
iemanja
(53,032 posts)Are absurd. You don't appear to be listening to the substance of what he says. He speaks slowly and deliberately, but there is nothing embarrassing to anyone but Trump and his lickspittle about his testimony.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)re-consider ever speaking in public as well. It's embarrassing.
Scottie Mom
(5,812 posts)Have done a lot of speaking in public considering my occupation.
Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)Quakerfriend
(5,450 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(26,326 posts)bottrott
(81 posts)Luttig is trying to limit the damage to just the ambiguous wording of the 12th instead of a widespread, coordinated attempt to overthrow government despite the fact he, himself, would have attempted to stop that abuse. That requires extreme hesitation and deliberation of every response so as not to open the door to a more widespread interpretation or reframing of what he says.
Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)mcar
(42,307 posts)He's speaking slowly and deliberately in an old-style lawyer way. But hey, he's not moving along as quickly as you'd like, so let's just ignore his very important testimony.
Triloon
(506 posts)He's not there to entertain you. His testimony for the Congressional Record may not be slickly delivered but it is intelligent, deeply considered, clear, and very helpful.
Why you would insult the man who is helping you is beyond me.
tavernier
(12,383 posts)before he allowed Pence to certify Trump.
I think his mind is perfectly clear.
yorkster
(1,490 posts)iemanja
(53,032 posts)There is an expectation to be entertained that is truly disturbing. This is about the gravest threat to our republic, and the Judge is giving crucial testimony about that. But you don't like him because he doesn't meet your notion of good TV.
Hamlette
(15,411 posts)He's a slow talker but his answers are considered and kick ass. I was spellbound through all of his 3 hour interview on the subject with frontline. You should slow down long enough to watch.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/j-michael-luttig-judge-mike-pence-house-jan-6-committee-hearings/
W_HAMILTON
(7,864 posts)...and realize that even the people on our side that should know better are helping contribute to the downward spiral through trivial and downright petty criticisms like this.
Dread Pirate Roberts
(1,896 posts)What a childish way to look at things. This very measured and conservative judge in an extremely uncomfortable position was smart enough to know the world was watching and was put in a role where there was ample opportunity to politicize anything he said. If you watched until the end, you know he had something very powerful to say-made all the more impactful because it came from a guy who probably never said anything hyperbolic or over the top in his life. A clear and present danger to democracy is a very intense thing to say-coming from someone clearly not prone to such statements speaks volumes.
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)Can't see the forest for the trees.
MerryBlooms
(11,769 posts)lamp_shade
(14,828 posts)obnoxiousdrunk
(2,910 posts)Bucky
(53,998 posts)He literally paused so long between each word that I would forget the subject of the sentence by the time he got to the verb or predicate. I think there might be some kind of medical condition inhibiting his ability to communicate. He clearly has an incisive and experienced legal mind. But he made it very hard to listen to what should have been compelling testimony
lamp_shade
(14,828 posts)Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)MerryBlooms
(11,769 posts)Disrespect to our J6 committee for calling him as a witness? Do you think our committee didn't know what they were doing? I find these attacks on the judge, bizarre and ridiculous. He was very insightful and his guarded language and delivery was riveting. These hearings are more than 20 second sound bites. This is about laying out the crimes that were committed.
Funtatlaguy
(10,870 posts)MerryBlooms
(11,769 posts)EndlessWire
(6,522 posts)Unless you are attending an ivy league law school and he is the lecturer, or you are in some deep doo doo in court somewhere, how are you going to meet someone like this?
But, I agree, I was fairly alarmed when he first started to speak. His first paragraph was almost incomprehensible, and quite frankly, I forgot what the question was. I listen very well, and some of what he said in the beginning made no sense.
But, I finally decided that the problem is that this guy is so smart, when he explains stuff, he speaks like a text book. It is not casual conversation. He filled in every nuance of each situation, and he spoke slowly, which I think was good. His role is to explain to the American public exactly why what Trump did was illegal, and that Trump is a threat to our Democracy.
I was a bit taken back at the end when the final questioner asked him a question, and he flatly said that he had already answered the question--or something like that. The questioner had the good sense to move on immediately and thank both the witnesses for their participation.
So, I personally can understand why some people think he was awful, but also I think that he added the perspective of a legal scholar who knows what he is talking about. He did use the forceful language I seem to crave lately, and I think he nailed it.
I thought the other witness was also good, and made a good contrast to Luttig. I can't wait to hear Donald's rebuttal to today's testimony.