@@williamlacentra2808 But when the convicted multiple murders rights start trumping the victims right for justice, THAT is where we lose the point. That man should have been put to death after the first life he took. The "justice" you're talking about is a kids game at this point, and AFTER he was already proven guilty too, don't forget this point, he did have have legal representation. He was found guilty, he did that shit. Democrats, they will fight tooth and nail for the most heinous among us, all while happily defending and bragging about slaughtering unborn babies. The Democrat ideology is bankrupt garbage. I truly wonder if you'd feel the same way about it if this was the guy that killed your mom/brother/wife/daughter or whatever, if you were one of the victims effected by his crimes? Bet you wouldn't be so high and mighty about it then. Again AFTER being found guilty.
If I'd given a script to Rod Sterling back in the day about the current times we live in, he would have thought it was too far beyond science fiction/fantasy. I'm sure he would have rejected it...talk about The Twilight Zone!
She pointed out the time was expired because she was following the Rules set out BY THE COMMITTEE. She was NOT pointing out that the time had expired; SHE WAS ASKING IF SHE WAS ALLOWED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ANYWAY!
dems invariably have a "sense of superiority." dems always treat people who oppose their agenda as being ignorant hillbillies at the very same moment that they label them as being a wealthy elite that does not pay its fair share of taxes.
That is the typical amoral, unprincipled, machine style- Democrat politician, who is for sale to whomever will help them gain more political power this week.
_Just a _*_few_*_ facts on Judge Jackson that i hastily garnered from Wikipedia:_ Her senior year High School, she *won the national oratory title at the National Catholic Forensic League championships* in New Orleans. She *studied government at Harvard University,* having applied despite her high school guidance counselor's advice to set her sights lower. She graduated from Harvard in 1992 with an A.B. _magna cum laude_ During college, she performed improv comedy. She *worked as a staff reporter and researcher for Time magazine* from 1992 to 1993. She *attended Harvard Law School* and *graduated in '96 with a Juris Doctor **_cum laude._* She was a *supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review.* After law school, she served as a *law clerk to judge Patti B. Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts* from 1996 to 1997, then to *judge Bruce M. Selya of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit* from 1997 to 1998. She spent a year in *private practice* at the Washington, D.C. law firm Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin Then *clerked for justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of the United States* from 1999 to 2000. She worked in *private legal practice from 2000 to 2003* From 2003 to 2005, she was *an assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission* From 2005 to 2007, Jackson was an *assistant federal public defender* in Washington, D.C., where she handled cases before U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. From 2007 to 2010, Jackson was an *appellate specialist* at Morrison & Foerster The U.S. Senate confirmed Jackson *vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission by unanimous consent on February 11, 2010.* February 14, 2013, her *nomination for United States District Court for the District of Columbia was reported to the full Senate by voice vote of the Senate Judiciary Committee.* She was *confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote on March 22, 2013.* Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, defended Jackson's record, saying *Jackson "has written nearly 600 opinions and been reversed less than twelve times".* [That means that her interpretation of the Law _as the Law_ is sound - & not improperly interpreted or applied according to her personal beliefs.] Yeah... Definitely hasn't put in the time & work to hold the honor & dignity of such an office... Unlike, say, Kavanagh who ranted about beer at _his_ hearing. Or Barrett who has _never tried a case or pled an appeal._ *SO TELL ME:* What have _YOU_ accomplished before the age of 52?
@@nonnyena4267 - you failed to mention she leans to the far left. I started my own business at age 28, retired at 52. Raised 4 wonderful kids, multiple home owner. Successful racing career. etc. etc. etc.
@@adingman9798 As she pointed out _repeatedly:_ *SHE* might lean to the left, but *SHE* keeps her personal opinions & religion *_OUT_* of her interpretation of the Law. _AND_ *SHE* did not perjure herself *_under Oath_*_ to _*_CONGRESS_* as previous *_confirmed_* justice nominees have. *SHE* presented herself with *dignity* in spite of some of the _insulting_ antics from the Committee. Congratulations on your successful business acumen & your racing career. I'm sure that those things are very important to you - things you strived for. Raising children is hard work. Judge Jackson only has two but they look like they were well raised. And again, the home-ownership... I didn't check on that part. I find it ... 'interesting" that you choose that to parlay against graduating _magna cum laude_ from Harvard. But what is important to _you_ is _important_ to you. Everybody knows something that someone else doesn't know, Everyone gets to choose how to share that bit and who to share it with. I'm sure what you have accomplished has affected more lives than just your wee family: Setting an example for other people to have a _positive_ impact on their corner of the world. She just chose a bigger corner than you & i did. SCOTUS _shouldn't_ *lean* and having someone whose _personal_ philosophies are a bit to the left ... Well. In this case it doesn't come close to balance the extreme _right_ leaning of at least three of the Justices who _decidedly_ *are* letting their _personal_ philosophies "help" them interpret the Law.
She WAS answering the "question", which is actually a NON-question, so him pounding on about it was just theatrics. What Hawley *_REALLY_* was asking was; "Why didn't you help Pennsylvania execute the death sentence he was given? Her answer is/was/znd ever shall be :"BECAUSE I WAS KEEPING MY OATH AS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT!" . There's a whole course in law schoo! where they explain valid logic and drawing conclusions. How to analyze answers. How to disguise a NON-questioon as something that _sounds_ right but isn't. Makes your "opponent" look/sound evasive. Stupid. Ignorant. Ridiculous. It's just a way of diminishing the other pers & getting the jury to doubt them and their testimony . What she is NOT filling in, because this is law pre-k - not even 101 so Hawley *_SHOULD_* know this _All Dearh Sentence cases have automatic appeals - very particular appeals, with very specific criteria _*_very specific time limits_*_ for filing_ Therefore, *_MOST_* trial lawyers hand this part over to lawyers who specialize in jt, The Court assigned the defendant to her firm. _She ix an OFFICER OF THE COURT. She *must* take the case unless she has a damn good reason not to - like conflict of interest. However she feels about the guy, she is DUTY-BOUND BY THE OATH SHE TOOK - and Hawley took the same one , though he seemx to think less of his Word than she does hers. She is duty-bound by her Oath to be certain that none of the defendant's Rights - as granted by the Constitution - were violated. Hawley _knows_ this. It doesn't matter an iota whether she agrees with the Death penalty or not. Her JOB was to be sure his rights were not violated_ What Ms Freeman is doing ix allowing Hawley the *_dignity_* of his Office by not lowering herself to a level where she exp!ains these *_very BASIC_* concepts to a sitting Senator. "I was assigned this case BY THE COURT" [shouldn't require an explanation that she HAD to accept it - we know she had no reason to recuse herself by the fact _that she accepted the case.]_ "I made sure his rights were protected" [evidently, at some point, they were NOT. SHE DID HER JOB, and found that out, and having found the violation, SHE CONTINUED *TO DO HER JOB* znd got the death penalty reversed] Hawley can keep on badgering her, it won't change her answer. Because it *_absolutely_* should go unsaid thzt any _personal_ views she might have on this defendent or this issue are just tbat: *_personal_* and _THIS_ is about her being capable of doing her JOB. I think the answers she gave him rather prove that she *_can._*
@@nonnyena4267 People like you always seem to forget that the victims had rights, too. He asked if she had regret for defending the indefensible and she countered with avoidance of answering the question.
@@da60586 "People like me". You mean people who have been kidnapped & raped? People who've been molested in school stairwells & told "boys will be boys"? People who've been beaten & asked why you let the guy - who also lives there - into the house to begin with? People who've been date-raped & repeatedly asked "What were you wearing?" (MY answer was "an Overton High School track team sweatshirt, a pair of Levi's big-bell jeans, blue knee high socks and a pair of adidas dragons") You mean someone who has survived multiple incidents of crime? Yes, I am aware that victims have Rights. WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM *_UNCIVILIZED_* COUNTRIES - _and _*_uncivilized_*_ PEOPLE_ - is that we *_ALL_* have those Rights until a court of law _proves_ - to a jury of our peers - that we do not deserve to keep all of them. The Judge or Jury determine how many of those Rights will be removed & how long they will be removed for - according to the Letter of the Law - in this case (as she repeatedly stated) as dictated by *_Congressional Mandates._* in a case where _where even the Right to continue breathing_ is in question, i _do_ believe it is even more important to be _absolutely _*_certain_* that all the accused Rights have been protected throughout the proceedings that got them to This Point. I don't like "loop-hole escapes" from justice, either. I have some questions about evidence being thrown out for technical reasons... BUT those technicalities help keep the investigators at least a bit ... "honest." I don't have an answer. *BUT* AGAIN: She *_IS_* answering the question - which is actually a *_NON_** -question. She took the case because she was **_assigned_** the case. She did her job to the best of her ability to protect the Rights of the accused. **_HOW_* she felt about her client had *_NO_* bearing on her doing her job to the best of her ability. *THAT **_IS_** THE ANSWER:* I did my JOB to the best of my ability _and how i _*_felt_*_ about it did _*_not_*_ matter or interfere._ *_WHAT SHE'S TELLING HAWLEY - AND THE REST OF CONGRESS - IS THAT SHE WILL_** NOT **_LET HER PERSONAL FEELINGS INTERFERE WITH HER INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW._*
I am TIRED of these friggin nominee's avoiding answering the questions they are asked. They are under oath and if they do not answer the question they should be disqualified!
Yeah. Senator Hawley -- who uses his _sister's_ *MISSOURI* address to loophole past the residency requirement to be Senator -- because he live over 900 miles east in *_Vienna, VA!_* He's a _real_ bastion of American values! While Judge Jackson... O! She is _something else altogether! _Just a _*_few_*_ facts on Judge Jackson that i hastily garnered from Wikipedia:_ Her senior year High School, she *won the national oratory title at the National Catholic Forensic League championships* in New Orleans. She *studied government at Harvard University,* having applied despite her high school guidance counselor's advice to set her sights lower. She graduated from Harvard in 1992 with an A.B. _magna cum laude_ During college, she performed improv comedy. She *worked as a staff reporter and researcher for Time magazine* from 1992 to 1993. She *attended Harvard Law School* and *graduated in '96 with a Juris Doctor **_cum laude._* She was a *supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review.* After law school, she served as a *law clerk to judge Patti B. Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts* from 1996 to 1997, then to *judge Bruce M. Selya of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit* from 1997 to 1998. She spent a year in *private practice* at the Washington, D.C. law firm Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin Then *clerked for justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of the United States* from 1999 to 2000. She worked in *private legal practice from 2000 to 2003* From 2003 to 2005, she was *an assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission* From 2005 to 2007, Jackson was an *assistant federal public defender* in Washington, D.C., where she handled cases before U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. From 2007 to 2010, Jackson was an *appellate specialist* at Morrison & Foerster The U.S. Senate confirmed Jackson *vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission by unanimous consent on February 11, 2010.* February 14, 2013, her *nomination for United States District Court for the District of Columbia was reported to the full Senate by voice vote of the Senate Judiciary Committee.* She was *confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote on March 22, 2013.* Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, defended Jackson's record, saying *Jackson "has written nearly 600 opinions and been reversed less than twelve times".* [That means that her interpretation of the Law _as the Law_ is sound - & not improperly interpreted or applied according to her personal beliefs.] Yeah... Definitely hasn't put in the time & work to hold the honor & dignity of such an office... Unlike, say, Kavanagh who ranted about beer at _his_ hearing. Or Barrett who has _never tried a case or pled an appeal._
Yeah ... Good ol' Hawley! Who got elected to serve as Senator for *_MISSOURI_* - even though he lives over 900 miles away in *_Vienna, VA._* He uses his _sister's_ address to loop-hole past that pesky ol' residency requirement to serve - _on the tax-payer's dime._ Yes, ma'am! you sure can _trust_ a man to do the right thing & protect the Laws of the land when he does a bit a lying & cheating in order to even be on the ballot! And you _are_ aware - i'm sure - that he believes that birth control pills should be illegal? Yep! Women should _all_ be barefoot, pregnant & tending to their homes & husbands.
@@barbarachieppo9603 Yes there are other methods. I guess i should have worded that differently: HIS philosophy precludes _any_ hormonal birth control: So No OCPs, No IUDs, No vaginal rings, No Injections & No implants. And _THOSE_ are all the birth control methods with the highest efficacies & lowest side effects. For _some_ people it _is_ hard to figure out & having an effective birth control with minimal inconvenience fits best with their lives. Who is *_HE_* (and who are *_YOU)_* to decide that for *_millions_* of women that you have _never_ met, don't know, and have *_NO_* idea of their daily paths?
He wasnt gay he murdered a gay guy the only thing that mattered for the nominee was the color of Terrance Williams skin....He is a Black guy surprise surprise.
@@josephcolubriale8591 January 6 was an FBI CIA operation and if you haven’t figured that out yet ,then you don’t the constitution yet maybe you should become a US citizen because if you were you would know that every law was broken that could be and still is!
@@wreckum56 look if this there is truth in this then it proves my point Mr Hawley and the rest should be asking about it and present ing evidence on your and others behalf on the house floor.
It's not right to state something and nobody follows it through, the usa has people with great integrity that would go after the truth be it right or left.
@@acemusichistory3622 I think you're right! Because with all the evidence of the attack on the Capitol and admissions by their own videos. These people shouldn't be represented properly. How does that sound to you?
@@ronaldchartrand9080 Apples & Oranges Chucky. According to this nominee, the murderer should walk, based on a TECHNICALITY. Which could cause/ caused a murderer to brutally murder AGAIN. What if it was your child that got brutally murdered b/c an Immoral defense attorney was only concerned with winning???
The guys does these most egregious crimes and this woman has a big smile on her face like she did something noble, by circumnavigating the laws to keep him from being executed??? It's this kind of person that goes through life with blinders on and only wakes up and smells the coffee ONLY when something bad happens to her or someone SHE loves.
Agree. Only when something directly affects them do they peer out of their very narrow, protected world. This woman and those like her are truly sickening. Imagine choosing to put your time and energy into defending the indefensible. That tells me she is not only deluded but stupid.
This Judicial nominee has a smile on her face because she is in a civilized environment----Unlike HAWLEY ----who thinks he is part of the SPANISH INQUISITION.....Lets not forget-----this nominee is interviewing for a position and has already been approved by the boss---The President-------She is not on trial-----get that in your head...!
@@williamlacentra2808 fortunately, you are in a very tiny minority who supports the strange views of this nominee. I would hardly liken this to any kind of Inquisition. For starters, we never get any answers!🙄
@@bronte6364 A Tiny minority ?.....Of what ------Most of the country has the same notion that every person , no ,matter what they are accused of----is warranted due process of the law----That means-----everyone gets a fair trial and is judged---not by you or Hawley but a jury of their peers---It also means that the accused gets a counsel-----that was this judicial pick who tries to defend that accused of the crime alleged or committed----Everything else---including your conjectured comment is window dressing and personal opinion--nothing else .!
These people are afraid to go on record under oath saying how they truly feel or where they truly stand. Be proud and tell us how you feel and where you stand. It's not hard unless you're a sadistic psychopath
Yes. They are not independent thinkers. They don't really have any personal convictions. They literally will fall for anything without even thinking it through.
I've been listening to people who know what kind of person she is.. A TOTAL RADICAL!!! Based on what Senator Hawley is describing.. I pray she's not going to make her way to the bench.
@@martinbarbaran5723 if you get arrested, you have a right to representation. She is doing that for a client. Attorneys represent guilty people every day and argue theyre not guilty. Thats how our system works.
Senator thank you for that question but I respectfully refuse to answer it on the grounds that will cause my answer to have me disqualified for this nomination.
Ask her if she fully supports the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution and the Law of the Land as contained in same. If she has an issue with any part or section, She is unqualified.
Great job senator Holly you're right she won't follow the law she'll follow her heart !!!! And that's where the problem lies. I hope she wasn't confirmed
@@williamlacentra2808 sorry about that William I was talking into my phone not physically texting it once I said it wrong but you know I'm exactly right with what I'm saying that's the problem with woke liberals they do what feels good to them not what's good for the whole of the country
Would she have that same feeling if it was someone in her immediate family? And if she would then I have no problem with that. Let these judges defend a murderer if it happened to her husband wife, or child. If they still stand by their conviction then I actually have respect for them.
I'd like to know how Arianna Freeman (FREE-MAN) would have have felt about the case if it were her parents or a family member who were the victims in these cases ? If she would defend such vile criminals like this in the past, how can anyone think she is on the side of justice ? She uses her position of working for a company at that time as though she was "just doing her job". What a cop-out excuse for participation in such an environment. I question sometimes why our government even allows for a trial in cases like this. I know it's a constitutional right, but in some cases such as these where the crime is so heinous and the facts in the case are so solid, why the ritual ? Someone who would go to bat for anybody who committed this type of crime has no conscious and should never be put in a position to judge. People like her are pinpoint focused on their personal achievement and agenda, and only attempt to nit pick the laws to fit their narrative. Imagine what the Supreme Court would look like for your children in the next 20 years !!
She is a fanatic and not a stable person She should not be a lawyer and is a disgrace to all of the victims that man murdered. Put her in prison with him.
This was relatively easy for him but Josh Hawley always has the best line of questioning. He pins them down, hems them in, gets to the real issue and forces them to either answer or make it obvious they don't want to answer. And he always remains professional.
It is more about her taking the position of defending evil people that have CLEARLY done some haness crimes and have been convicted as it was proven they were guilty. So for her to step in and say, well this guy is evil and a murder and has already been proven guilty. I am going to stand up here and defend him even MORE. Evil begets evil.
I'm so sick of what Brandon And the left consider and then have the Gaul to lie & under oath & under mine the laws of this country and human rights of those who have been brutally harmed & murdered ! Then with someone like this you all You can do is try to BS your way out of what is evident even to a layman !! Are you related to Brandon??? A STRONG NO VOTE!!! thank you Senator for holding these nominees feet to the 🔥 fire.
Nobody ever fucking answers questions in these hearings. I can’t wait until I’m in court and I can just dance around questions and never have to actually say anything.
Remember when the prosecutor can decide that the criminal murderer has a cultural exemption because they happen to have the same culture. Our culture as America liberty and justice for all goes away. One Nation one law one people. No one is above the law. Many of these people are given the Second Chance the Second Chance the Second Chance the second chance and people are dead because of it. Judges need to be accountable when they release criminals out on the street and the criminal goes to kill someone the judge should be charged as an accessory with murder
It's people like this, that has crime getting out of control. This lady should not be confirmed.
I swear these people like her make me convinced to go into law in order to uphold our law and order.
You are not in law because you don't have a legal mind prospective-----Everyone, including an accused murderer should have legal representation.....!
she upheld the law. Hawley is arguing she should not have
@@williamlacentra2808 But when the convicted multiple murders rights start trumping the victims right for justice, THAT is where we lose the point. That man should have been put to death after the first life he took. The "justice" you're talking about is a kids game at this point, and AFTER he was already proven guilty too, don't forget this point, he did have have legal representation. He was found guilty, he did that shit.
Democrats, they will fight tooth and nail for the most heinous among us, all while happily defending and bragging about slaughtering unborn babies. The Democrat ideology is bankrupt garbage. I truly wonder if you'd feel the same way about it if this was the guy that killed your mom/brother/wife/daughter or whatever, if you were one of the victims effected by his crimes? Bet you wouldn't be so high and mighty about it then. Again AFTER being found guilty.
@@jimmybone5128 In the US, a little over half of Republicans support Roe v Wade.
@@williamlacentra2808 she argued against giving him the death penalty. pay attention.she was not his lawyer.
She is absolutely disgusting she is not a judge if she can’t let justice be served.
Great Pick Joe!!! Of course, HE didn't pick her, he can't even pick his NOSE. But she is from PA!!!! Votes!!!!
Under NO circumstances shall we offend BLACK thug shoplifters.
😡
Yes, especially after hearing about that shit-stained animal she tried to free from the death he deserved.
The fact that these types of people keep getting nominated is almost Twilight Zonish.
I think it’s a systematic tear down of the US piece by piece… by big money
@@keezer4346 absolutely dead on statement. Surprised we have not had another Civil War by now its gotten so out of hand.
If I'd given a script to Rod Sterling back in the day about the current times we live in, he would have thought it was too far beyond science fiction/fantasy. I'm sure he would have rejected it...talk about The Twilight Zone!
Well he has to appoint someone as dumb as he is!
The demo dummies out vote the Republicans and the conservatives!
Hard to find words on this one ... really want to believe this did not happen in real life.
Horrific
The fact she pointed out that the time had expired says everything!! Biden`s nominees show that it`s just more of the same old chaos!
She pointed out the time was expired because she was following the Rules set out BY THE COMMITTEE. She was NOT pointing out that the time had expired; SHE WAS ASKING IF SHE WAS ALLOWED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ANYWAY!
@@nonnyena4267 Do you really believe that?
@@nonnyena4267 not her job to point out... troll
@@nonnyena4267 No, she was vying for the chair to bail her out and move on the the next politicians that would stroke her ego.
NO, same old evil, vile trash.....
The Show Me State just showed you a SNAKE in the grass. Thank you Senator Hawley.
Her sense of superiority and contempt just really shines through.
Despicable
dems invariably have a "sense of superiority." dems always treat people who oppose their agenda as being ignorant hillbillies at the very same moment that they label them as being a wealthy elite that does not pay its fair share of taxes.
Where did you get that??
Another snake in a suit . . . but hey, she's the right color and gender, and that's what's really important according to Brandon and his handlers.
Cesar MO Was the defender the same colour?
I watched the SOTU confusion spoken by brandon and brandon did not use the word EQUITY once.
Winning to her is more important than morality.
That is what Law Schools teach.
That is the typical amoral, unprincipled, machine style- Democrat politician, who is for sale to whomever will help them gain more political power this week.
Wow, just wow!! This woman is not fit to be a court reporter let alone a judge.
She's cute, probably she get there like Kamala.
black and a vagina those are the only qualifications Joe Biden needs.
_Just a _*_few_*_ facts on Judge Jackson that i hastily garnered from Wikipedia:_
Her senior year High School, she *won the national oratory title at the National Catholic Forensic League championships* in New Orleans.
She *studied government at Harvard University,* having applied despite her high school guidance counselor's advice to set her sights lower.
She graduated from Harvard in 1992 with an A.B. _magna cum laude_
During college, she performed improv comedy.
She *worked as a staff reporter and researcher for Time magazine* from 1992 to 1993.
She *attended Harvard Law School* and *graduated in '96 with a Juris Doctor **_cum laude._*
She was a *supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review.*
After law school, she served as a *law clerk to judge Patti B. Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts* from 1996 to 1997,
then to *judge Bruce M. Selya of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit* from 1997 to 1998.
She spent a year in *private practice* at the Washington, D.C. law firm Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin
Then *clerked for justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of the United States* from 1999 to 2000.
She worked in *private legal practice from 2000 to 2003*
From 2003 to 2005, she was *an assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission*
From 2005 to 2007, Jackson was an *assistant federal public defender* in Washington, D.C., where she handled cases before U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
From 2007 to 2010, Jackson was an *appellate specialist* at Morrison & Foerster
The U.S. Senate confirmed Jackson *vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission by unanimous consent on February 11, 2010.*
February 14, 2013, her *nomination for United States District Court for the District of Columbia was reported to the full Senate by voice vote of the Senate Judiciary Committee.*
She was *confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote on March 22, 2013.*
Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, defended Jackson's record, saying *Jackson "has written nearly 600 opinions and been reversed less than twelve times".*
[That means that her interpretation of the Law _as the Law_ is sound - & not improperly interpreted or applied according to her personal beliefs.]
Yeah... Definitely hasn't put in the time & work to hold the honor & dignity of such an office... Unlike, say, Kavanagh who ranted about beer at _his_ hearing. Or Barrett who has _never tried a case or pled an appeal._
*SO TELL ME:* What have _YOU_ accomplished before the age of 52?
@@nonnyena4267 - you failed to mention she leans to the far left.
I started my own business at age 28, retired at 52. Raised 4 wonderful kids, multiple home owner. Successful racing career. etc. etc. etc.
@@adingman9798 As she pointed out _repeatedly:_ *SHE* might lean to the left, but *SHE* keeps her personal opinions & religion *_OUT_* of her interpretation of the Law.
_AND_ *SHE* did not perjure herself *_under Oath_*_ to _*_CONGRESS_* as previous *_confirmed_* justice nominees have.
*SHE* presented herself with *dignity* in spite of some of the _insulting_ antics from the Committee.
Congratulations on your successful business acumen & your racing career. I'm sure that those things are very important to you - things you strived for. Raising children is hard work. Judge Jackson only has two but they look like they were well raised.
And again, the home-ownership... I didn't check on that part. I find it ... 'interesting" that you choose that to parlay against graduating _magna cum laude_ from Harvard. But what is important to _you_ is _important_ to you. Everybody knows something that someone else doesn't know, Everyone gets to choose how to share that bit and who to share it with.
I'm sure what you have accomplished has affected more lives than just your wee family: Setting an example for other people to have a _positive_ impact on their corner of the world.
She just chose a bigger corner than you & i did.
SCOTUS _shouldn't_ *lean* and having someone whose _personal_ philosophies are a bit to the left ... Well. In this case it doesn't come close to balance the extreme _right_ leaning of at least three of the Justices who _decidedly_ *are* letting their _personal_ philosophies "help" them interpret the Law.
She keeps saying 'i'm not responsible' - good, stay on the lower bench.
The movie The Devil's Advocate comes to mind after watching this video...
I really wish when questioned at these hearings people would just answer the question.
She WAS answering the "question", which is actually a NON-question, so him pounding on about it was just theatrics.
What Hawley *_REALLY_* was asking was; "Why didn't you help Pennsylvania execute the death sentence he was given?
Her answer is/was/znd ever shall be
:"BECAUSE I WAS KEEPING MY OATH AS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT!"
.
There's a whole course in law schoo! where they explain valid logic and drawing conclusions. How to analyze answers. How to disguise a NON-questioon as something that _sounds_ right but isn't. Makes your "opponent" look/sound evasive. Stupid. Ignorant. Ridiculous. It's just a way of diminishing the other pers & getting the jury to doubt them and their testimony .
What she is NOT filling in, because this is law pre-k - not even 101 so Hawley *_SHOULD_* know this
_All Dearh Sentence cases have automatic appeals - very particular appeals, with very specific criteria _*_very specific time limits_*_ for filing_ Therefore, *_MOST_* trial lawyers hand this part over to lawyers who specialize in jt,
The Court assigned the defendant to her firm. _She ix an OFFICER OF THE COURT. She *must* take the case unless she has a damn good reason not to - like conflict of interest. However she feels about the guy, she is DUTY-BOUND BY THE OATH SHE TOOK - and Hawley took the same one , though he seemx to think less of his Word than she does hers.
She is duty-bound by her Oath to be certain that none of the defendant's Rights - as granted by the Constitution - were violated. Hawley _knows_ this. It doesn't matter an iota whether she agrees with the Death penalty or not. Her JOB was to be sure his rights were not violated_
What Ms Freeman is doing ix allowing Hawley the *_dignity_* of his Office by not lowering herself to a level where she exp!ains these *_very BASIC_* concepts to a sitting Senator.
"I was assigned this case BY THE COURT" [shouldn't require an explanation that she HAD to accept it - we know she had no reason to recuse herself by the fact _that she accepted the case.]_
"I made sure his rights were protected" [evidently, at some point, they were NOT. SHE DID HER JOB, and found that out, and having found the violation, SHE CONTINUED *TO DO HER JOB* znd got the death penalty reversed]
Hawley can keep on badgering her, it won't change her answer. Because it *_absolutely_* should go unsaid thzt any _personal_ views she might have on this defendent or this issue are just tbat: *_personal_* and _THIS_ is about her being capable of doing her JOB.
I think the answers she gave him rather prove that she *_can._*
@@nonnyena4267 People like you always seem to forget that the victims had rights, too. He asked if she had regret for defending the indefensible and she countered with avoidance of answering the question.
@@da60586 "People like me".
You mean people who have been kidnapped & raped?
People who've been molested in school stairwells & told "boys will be boys"?
People who've been beaten & asked why you let the guy - who also lives there - into the house to begin with?
People who've been date-raped & repeatedly asked "What were you wearing?" (MY answer was "an Overton High School track team sweatshirt, a pair of Levi's big-bell jeans, blue knee high socks and a pair of adidas dragons")
You mean someone who has survived multiple incidents of crime?
Yes, I am aware that victims have Rights.
WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM *_UNCIVILIZED_* COUNTRIES - _and _*_uncivilized_*_ PEOPLE_ - is that we *_ALL_* have those Rights until a court of law _proves_ - to a jury of our peers - that we do not deserve to keep all of them. The Judge or Jury determine how many of those Rights will be removed & how long they will be removed for - according to the Letter of the Law - in this case (as she repeatedly stated) as dictated by *_Congressional Mandates._*
in a case where _where even the Right to continue breathing_ is in question, i _do_ believe it is even more important to be _absolutely _*_certain_* that all the accused Rights have been protected throughout the proceedings that got them to This Point.
I don't like "loop-hole escapes" from justice, either. I have some questions about evidence being thrown out for technical reasons... BUT those technicalities help keep the investigators at least a bit ... "honest." I don't have an answer.
*BUT*
AGAIN: She *_IS_* answering the question - which is actually a *_NON_** -question. She took the case because she was **_assigned_** the case. She did her job to the best of her ability to protect the Rights of the accused. **_HOW_* she felt about her client had *_NO_* bearing on her doing her job to the best of her ability.
*THAT **_IS_** THE ANSWER:* I did my JOB to the best of my ability _and how i _*_felt_*_ about it did _*_not_*_ matter or interfere._
*_WHAT SHE'S TELLING HAWLEY - AND THE REST OF CONGRESS - IS THAT SHE WILL_** NOT **_LET HER PERSONAL FEELINGS INTERFERE WITH HER INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW._*
I am TIRED of these friggin nominee's avoiding answering the questions they are asked. They are under oath and if they do not answer the question they should be disqualified!
Absolutely
what question didnt she answer?
Automatically!
@@bgbgbg123 Evasive
We need to see a three strike rule in place.
THANK YOU SEN JOSH HAWLEY😄❤
Excellent job Sen. Hawley for exposing this nominee.
Yeah. Senator Hawley -- who uses his _sister's_ *MISSOURI* address to loophole past the residency requirement to be Senator -- because he live over 900 miles east in *_Vienna, VA!_*
He's a _real_ bastion of American values!
While Judge Jackson... O! She is _something else altogether!
_Just a _*_few_*_ facts on Judge Jackson that i hastily garnered from Wikipedia:_
Her senior year High School, she *won the national oratory title at the National Catholic Forensic League championships* in New Orleans.
She *studied government at Harvard University,* having applied despite her high school guidance counselor's advice to set her sights lower.
She graduated from Harvard in 1992 with an A.B. _magna cum laude_
During college, she performed improv comedy.
She *worked as a staff reporter and researcher for Time magazine* from 1992 to 1993.
She *attended Harvard Law School* and *graduated in '96 with a Juris Doctor **_cum laude._*
She was a *supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review.*
After law school, she served as a *law clerk to judge Patti B. Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts* from 1996 to 1997,
then to *judge Bruce M. Selya of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit* from 1997 to 1998.
She spent a year in *private practice* at the Washington, D.C. law firm Miller Cassidy Larroca & Lewin
Then *clerked for justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of the United States* from 1999 to 2000.
She worked in *private legal practice from 2000 to 2003*
From 2003 to 2005, she was *an assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission*
From 2005 to 2007, Jackson was an *assistant federal public defender* in Washington, D.C., where she handled cases before U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
From 2007 to 2010, Jackson was an *appellate specialist* at Morrison & Foerster
The U.S. Senate confirmed Jackson *vice chair of the United States Sentencing Commission by unanimous consent on February 11, 2010.*
February 14, 2013, her *nomination for United States District Court for the District of Columbia was reported to the full Senate by voice vote of the Senate Judiciary Committee.*
She was *confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote on March 22, 2013.*
Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, defended Jackson's record, saying *Jackson "has written nearly 600 opinions and been reversed less than twelve times".*
[That means that her interpretation of the Law _as the Law_ is sound - & not improperly interpreted or applied according to her personal beliefs.]
Yeah... Definitely hasn't put in the time & work to hold the honor & dignity of such an office... Unlike, say, Kavanagh who ranted about beer at _his_ hearing. Or Barrett who has _never tried a case or pled an appeal._
I love Mr. Hawley.👍🇺🇸
Yeah ... Good ol' Hawley! Who got elected to serve as Senator for *_MISSOURI_* - even though he lives over 900 miles away in *_Vienna, VA._* He uses his _sister's_ address to loop-hole past that pesky ol' residency requirement to serve - _on the tax-payer's dime._
Yes, ma'am! you sure can _trust_ a man to do the right thing & protect the Laws of the land when he does a bit a lying & cheating in order to even be on the ballot!
And you _are_ aware - i'm sure - that he believes that birth control pills should be illegal? Yep! Women should _all_ be barefoot, pregnant & tending to their homes & husbands.
@@nonnyena4267 There are many other types of birth control besides pills . It's not that difficult to figure out.
@@barbarachieppo9603 Yes there are other methods.
I guess i should have worded that differently:
HIS philosophy precludes _any_ hormonal birth control: So No OCPs, No IUDs, No vaginal rings, No Injections & No implants. And _THOSE_ are all the birth control methods with the highest efficacies & lowest side effects.
For _some_ people it _is_ hard to figure out & having an effective birth control with minimal inconvenience fits best with their lives.
Who is *_HE_* (and who are *_YOU)_* to decide that for *_millions_* of women that you have _never_ met, don't know, and have *_NO_* idea of their daily paths?
So if you are a gay murderer, you don’t deserve the death penalty?
He wasnt gay he murdered a gay guy the only thing that mattered for the nominee was the color of Terrance Williams skin....He is a Black guy surprise surprise.
Thank you Josh Hawley.
We need more people like Josh Hawley to run for office,less like AOC who doesn’t see this?
How shameless and despicable a court nominee has to be in order to be nominated 🤔 I'm sick disgusted and I can't believe this is real!🤮
Filth seems to be the qualifier
She lies at every opportunity!
Do did Josh Hawley on January 6 th the traitor
@@josephcolubriale8591 say what?
@@josephcolubriale8591 January 6 was an FBI CIA operation and if you haven’t figured that out yet ,then you don’t the constitution yet maybe you should become a US citizen because if you were you would know that every law was broken that could be and still is!
@@wreckum56 look if this there is truth in this then it proves my point Mr Hawley and the rest should be asking about it and present ing evidence on your and others behalf on the house floor.
It's not right to state something and nobody follows it through, the usa has people with great integrity that would go after the truth be it right or left.
Thank GOD for common sense people like Harley fighting for WE THE PEOPLE’S interests!!🇺🇸♥️🇺🇸
Lol. He just said. People are not entitled to a good lawyer that will defend their rights.
@@ronaldchartrand9080 I’m pretty sure this scumbag he’s referring to doesn’t deserve any rights.
@@ronaldchartrand9080 oh obviously we’re not listening or cannot comprehend
@@acemusichistory3622 I think you're right! Because with all the evidence of the attack on the Capitol and admissions by their own videos. These people shouldn't be represented properly. How does that sound to you?
@@ronaldchartrand9080
Apples & Oranges Chucky. According to this nominee, the murderer should walk, based on a
TECHNICALITY. Which could cause/ caused a murderer to brutally murder AGAIN.
What if it was your child that got brutally murdered b/c an
Immoral defense attorney was only concerned with winning???
God help us if she is appointed
Josh..keep at it ..times are dangerous...may the Lord protect you all..
This is scary
The guys does these most egregious crimes and this woman has a big smile on her face like she did something noble, by circumnavigating the laws to keep him from being executed??? It's this kind of person that goes through life with blinders on and only wakes up and smells the coffee ONLY when something bad happens to her or someone SHE loves.
Agree. Only when something directly affects them do they peer out of their very narrow, protected world. This woman and those like her are truly sickening. Imagine choosing to put your time and energy into defending the indefensible. That tells me she is not only deluded but stupid.
That smile indicates "SATANIC VIRTUE SIGNALING "
This Judicial nominee has a smile on her face because she is in a civilized environment----Unlike HAWLEY ----who thinks he is part of the SPANISH INQUISITION.....Lets not forget-----this nominee is interviewing for a position and has already been approved by the boss---The President-------She is not on trial-----get that in your head...!
@@williamlacentra2808 fortunately, you are in a very tiny minority who supports the strange views of this nominee. I would hardly liken this to any kind of Inquisition. For starters, we never get any answers!🙄
@@bronte6364 A Tiny minority ?.....Of what ------Most of the country has the same notion that every person , no ,matter what they are accused of----is warranted due process of the law----That means-----everyone gets a fair trial and is judged---not by you or Hawley but a jury of their peers---It also means that the accused gets a counsel-----that was this judicial pick who tries to defend that accused of the crime alleged or committed----Everything else---including your conjectured comment is window dressing and personal opinion--nothing else .!
These people are afraid to go on record under oath saying how they truly feel or where they truly stand. Be proud and tell us how you feel and where you stand. It's not hard unless you're a sadistic psychopath
Yes. They are not independent thinkers. They don't really have any personal convictions. They literally will fall for anything without even thinking it through.
She's a big no!
I bet she wouldn’t have the same opinion if she was locked in a room with the killers she set fee
She did not set this murderer free.
She did do her job.
@@annebalderston2520 I awesome job for a bottom feeding lawyer … lawyers are the reason this country lost its freedom
Hawley is amazing.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) is clear and concise!
She defended him all because of his sexuality she doesn’t deserve to be anywhere near the law.
The murder victim was gay - not the defendant.
@@jm08050 Dang so does that make her homophobic then.
@@jm08050 It says that he lured his victim to bed.
No she defended him cuz he was black .
Oh but she is near the law-----in-fact she is already a Judge...!
ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!! She should NOT be a judge
She came and she don't need to be even consider for anything in the public office
Hawley rocks!
Wow her smugness was on display. She seems that she is above the law and has zero concern for the victims.
Smugness?
Thank You Good Sir!!!THANK YOU MR.HAWLEY For Your Outstanding Work!!
THEY NEVER ANSWER THE QUESTION. GIVE A BREAK. DO NOT CONFIRM HER.
How will out country ever come back from evil demons like her being in the judicial system?
I've been listening to people who know what kind of person she is.. A TOTAL RADICAL!!!
Based on what Senator Hawley is describing.. I pray she's not going to make her way to the bench.
I sounds like a complice defending a murderer..no way she should be confirmed..she is a danger to the laws and people..
Elect a Clown, Expect a Circus. #fjb.
@@martinbarbaran5723 if you get arrested, you have a right to representation. She is doing that for a client. Attorneys represent guilty people every day and argue theyre not guilty. Thats how our system works.
This woman clearly should not be anywhere near a court justice system.
👎 Keep the gavel out of her hand!
Utterly SCARY. SAY NO.
Get'em, Josh, Get'em.
Her actions and answers reflect that she is definitely Biden nominee.
I wonder if Ms. Freeman would defend a citizen whom exercised his or her 2nd Amendment right as vigorously as she defends a cold-blooded murderer?
Noooope.
She needs a few moments to think of a lie.
As a PA resident I am truly embarrassed.
Senator thank you for that question but I respectfully refuse to answer it on the grounds that will cause my answer to have me disqualified for this nomination.
This is unbelievable
How can you trust the justice system
She is the last one we need on the Supreme Court!
Amen
Mr. Hawley: Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for doing your homework!!
Ask her if she fully supports the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution and the Law of the Land as contained in same. If she has an issue with any part or section, She is unqualified.
Great job senator Holly you're right she won't follow the law she'll follow her heart !!!! And that's where the problem lies. I hope she wasn't confirmed
Before you congratulate HAWLEY------spell his name right...!
@@williamlacentra2808 : hey Bill, lighten up on Joseph he's probably 80 years old with bad eyesight! ---js
@@williamlacentra2808 sorry about that William I was talking into my phone not physically texting it once I said it wrong but you know I'm exactly right with what I'm saying that's the problem with woke liberals they do what feels good to them not what's good for the whole of the country
Would she have that same feeling if it was someone in her immediate family? And if she would then I have no problem with that. Let these judges defend a murderer if it happened to her husband wife, or child. If they still stand by their conviction then I actually have respect for them.
Seems like a good fit for the path we're on.
Sadly, you're right!!
I'd like to know how Arianna Freeman (FREE-MAN) would have have felt about the case if it were her parents or a family member who were the victims in these cases ? If she would defend such vile criminals like this in the past, how can anyone think she is on the side of justice ? She uses her position of working for a company at that time as though she was "just doing her job". What a cop-out excuse for participation in such an environment. I question sometimes why our government even allows for a trial in cases like this. I know it's a constitutional right, but in some cases such as these where the crime is so heinous and the facts in the case are so solid, why the ritual ? Someone who would go to bat for anybody who committed this type of crime has no conscious and should never be put in a position to judge. People like her are pinpoint focused on their personal achievement and agenda, and only attempt to nit pick the laws to fit their narrative. Imagine what the Supreme Court would look like for your children in the next 20 years !!
America is becoming a scary place to live when these people are even nominated to a position like this.
Boom. Block this activist from her nomination. She’s trouble.
Wow! So brutal injustice to the victims and family! Inhumane!
LAWLESSNESS! LAWLESSNESS!
She is a fanatic and not a stable person
She should not be a lawyer and is a disgrace to all of the victims that man murdered. Put her in prison with him.
BRUTAL 😆
This was relatively easy for him but Josh Hawley always has the best line of questioning.
He pins them down, hems them in, gets to the real issue and forces them to either answer or make it obvious they don't want to answer.
And he always remains professional.
Legal defense of a murderer is not necessarily a bad thing, letting one go that will most certainly do it again is...
Your comment makes no sense.
It is more about her taking the position of defending evil people that have CLEARLY done some haness crimes and have been convicted as it was proven they were guilty. So for her to step in and say, well this guy is evil and a murder and has already been proven guilty. I am going to stand up here and defend him even MORE. Evil begets evil.
@@jm08050 you need to improve your comprehension ability , if that's possible .
I'm so sick of what Brandon
And the left consider and then have the Gaul to lie & under oath & under mine the laws of this country and human rights of those who have been brutally harmed & murdered ! Then with someone like this you all
You can do is try to BS your way out of what is evident even to a layman !! Are you related to Brandon??? A STRONG NO VOTE!!! thank you Senator for holding these nominees feet to the 🔥 fire.
thanks
Nobody ever fucking answers questions in these hearings. I can’t wait until I’m in court and I can just dance around questions and never have to actually say anything.
she is not a good example. sad future with these fools exerting their lunacy
Figures. A biden nominee.
Elect a Clown, Expect a Circus. #fjb.
@@jamescosby2343 well said
Remember when the prosecutor can decide that the criminal murderer has a cultural exemption because they happen to have the same culture. Our culture as America liberty and justice for all goes away. One Nation one law one people. No one is above the law. Many of these people are given the Second Chance the Second Chance the Second Chance the second chance and people are dead because of it. Judges need to be accountable when they release criminals out on the street and the criminal goes to kill someone the judge should be charged as an accessory with murder
She stuttered around trying to find a good answer.
I wonder if the murdered victim was her family , if it would make a difference ...
I love her face when she thought that she had Hawley, only to have him throw FACTS in her face.
any lawyer that defends a known criminal should take the punishment as well
Wow. Amazing.
We all know why she defended him!!!
Wow and you people want her on the Supreme Court no wonder our country is going to hell in a handbasket
Agreed
@Spade I believe she means the progressives.
Wrong! She was nominated to serve on the Third Circuit.
@@jm08050 WHAT!
I was referring to the progressives the people who would vote for her
What a bummer.
Another gobsmacking nomination. Jesus H, wake up America
What about the victims right and their families rights
Yup!
Seems like she's in over her head on this one.
I know one place she needs to be nominated don’t drop the 🧼
"Congratulations to each nominee." "Thank you for that question."
SICK
Horrible,horrible,horrible!!!
She has blood on her hands.
No.
Thank you Sen. Hawley. Ms Freeman's obscene defense of Williams is enough to rule her utterly out of contention for the Supreme Court. STOP HER!
Wow, and she still doesn't answer anything........
Man kills for thrills, and she smiles and is proud to say she got his death penalty revoked
What in the.....
Hawley is a Rock Star!
That's just the thing.
She won't follow the law but will attempt to change it.
She is not qualified for the job due to her history
Go Hawley!!!!Hell no on her!!!!!
The unlawfulness was letting him live.
Saved by the bell
This goes to show us how these judges should not be serving on the bench in a court of law.