Seriously America - when the Senate Judicial Committee can approve

[malaise]

the appointment of a 35 year old who is three years out of law school and has never tried a case, we may need a stronger word than Kakistocracy -a system of government which is run by the worst, least qualified, or most unscrupulous citizens.

This man was voted unqualified by the American Bar Association How is he approved as a Federal Judge?

Americans should be in the street for this one - this is the deliberate destruction of a branch of government by the most partisan government in history.

This has to stop or be stopped.
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/trump-nominee-for-federal-judge-has-never-tried-a-case-1093618755771

LOCK THEM UP!

[no_hypocrisy]

1. My guess is that the republicans on the SJC privately opined that the nominee

had the right politics and that his clerks would do all the research and writing anyway. All he would have to do is sign off on the decisions.

I don't care if the nominee was law review (Dean's List in law school.) He barely knows how to be a lawyer, let alone a judge.

The Senate wouldn't have approved Harriet Miers in 2005 to the Supreme Court even though she was Bush's personal attorney (although it did approve Alberto Gonzalez as AG despite the fact prior to the nomination, he was a real estate attorney).

Here's the problem: no filibuster. It was removed during the Obama years to get HIS nominees approved. All you need is 50 republicans and Talley is on his first step to perhaps the Supreme Court. (And I bet you thought you couldn't get more obtuse than Clarence Thomas . . . . )

[Volaris]

2. '...it did approve Alberto Gonzales...'

Lol yeah and how'd that work out??

My traffic lawyer is more qualified for this job than this clown. How are State Bar Associations not screaming their fool bloody heads off about this?

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Talley was rated unacceptable by the ABA.

That's sufficient to look to another nominee.

[Volaris]

4. I agree. One would think that would apply to the Senate judiciary comm as well,

But obviously fucking not.

[Cosmocat]

6. As to your last point

McConnell absolutely, no ifs, ands or buts, would have done away with the filibuster for judicial appointments at 12:01 am, January 1 of this year.

Only difference is that the dems would not have been able to seat a single fin judge during BHO's tenure.

[Madam45for2923]

5. Donald's version of KaKaKa-stocy was evident for all to see from day ONE.

but some thought we had nothing to lose & the revolution would be exciting.

[smirkymonkey]

7. There are 11 republicans and 9 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The vote for Talley was 11-9 in favor of Talley. This is partisan politics at its worst. It's such a joke.

[PearliePoo2]

8. This is their long-run objective! Pack the courts with their puppets.

Republicans...I HATE their fucking guts! ALL of them. ANY of them.

K&R