Barrett's Notes
-
The Iconic Moment ACB Demonstrated Her Brilliance Without Saying a Word
Judge Amy Coney Barrett repeatedly demonstrated her judicial brilliance during Tuesday’s hearing, but the most iconic moment of them all came during Texas Senator John Cornyn’s questioning.“Most of us have multiple notebooks and notes and books and things like that in front of us,” observed Senator Cornyn. “Can you hold up what you’ve been referring to in answering our questions?”
With a grin, Judge Amy Coney Barrett held up the notebook that had been provided to her.
“Is there anything on it?” asked Senator Cornyn.
“The letterhead that says U.S. Senate,” replied Barrett.
Without any notes whatsoever, Judge Amy Coney Barrett has demonstrated she can handle the most aggressive onslaught of loaded questions with ease. Her ability to recall quotes, statutes, cases, and relevant laws is extraordinary, so much so that she’s been able to outsmart Democrat senators with troves of notes and diligent staffers trying to trap her in a corner.
-
I haven't listen to the hearings, but are they allowed to bring in a bunch of notes and say, "just a second, let me dig through these for one or two minutes"
After all, they are asking her about things in her area of expertise.
I would think @Copper that if you sat down to talk to a group about flying, you would probably do a pretty good job without notes.
(Not to say that she isn't super smart. I think she is.)
-
I haven't listen to the hearings, but are they allowed to bring in a bunch of notes and say, "just a second, let me dig through these for one or two minutes"
After all, they are asking her about things in her area of expertise.
I would think @Copper that if you sat down to talk to a group about flying, you would probably do a pretty good job without notes.
(Not to say that she isn't super smart. I think she is.)
@taiwan_girl said in Barrett's Notes:
I haven't listen to the hearings, but are they allowed to bring in a bunch of notes and say, "just a second, let me dig through these for one or two minutes"
After all, they are asking her about things in her area of expertise.
I would think @Copper that if you sat down to talk to a group about flying, you would probably do a pretty good job without notes.
(Not to say that she isn't super smart. I think she is.)
You need to know sonething...I think almost every Dem, if not every Dem on that committee has a law degree. And they have many minions working for them, that have law degrees.
And it is hilarious to watch Barrett hand them their asses. The exchange with Spartacus, was worth the price of admission. She made Booker look like an idiot, with one sentence.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Barrett's Notes:
I haven't listen to the hearings, but are they allowed to bring in a bunch of notes and say, "just a second, let me dig through these for one or two minutes"
After all, they are asking her about things in her area of expertise.
I would think @Copper that if you sat down to talk to a group about flying, you would probably do a pretty good job without notes.
(Not to say that she isn't super smart. I think she is.)
You need to know sonething...I think almost every Dem, if not every Dem on that committee has a law degree. And they have many minions working for them, that have law degrees.
And it is hilarious to watch Barrett hand them their asses. The exchange with Spartacus, was worth the price of admission. She made Booker look like an idiot, with one sentence.
@Jolly said in Barrett's Notes:
She made Booker look like an idiot, with one sentence.
Nah. He did that himself.
One comment was the the "questioning" by the senators looked more like campaign speeches than actual interrogation. Maizie (sp?) was particularly vapid.
-
Why are are they even having the hearing?
What are the chance that any of the Senators from either side will change their mind? Pretty much zero.
Their vote was made up as soon as President Trump made his announcement for her. I think I read that there were 2 or 3 senators who used their time to make political statements rather than actually question her.
-
Why are are they even having the hearing?
What are the chance that any of the Senators from either side will change their mind? Pretty much zero.
Their vote was made up as soon as President Trump made his announcement for her. I think I read that there were 2 or 3 senators who used their time to make political statements rather than actually question her.
@taiwan_girl said in Barrett's Notes:
there were 2 or 3all senatorswhoused their time to make political statementsThere.
I may be wrong, but I think Sheldon Whitehouse didn't even ask a question during his time.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sheldon-whitehouse-barrett-hearing-dark-money-scheme-supreme-court
-
@taiwan_girl said in Barrett's Notes:
there were 2 or 3all senatorswhoused their time to make political statementsThere.
I may be wrong, but I think Sheldon Whitehouse didn't even ask a question during his time.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sheldon-whitehouse-barrett-hearing-dark-money-scheme-supreme-court
@George-K Yep. Perfect example. LOL
I do believe that he was not the only one.
Who is he trying to impress? I would be more impressed if he actually did his job. LOL
-
@George-K Yep. Perfect example. LOL
I do believe that he was not the only one.
Who is he trying to impress? I would be more impressed if he actually did his job. LOL
@taiwan_girl said in Barrett's Notes:
@George-K Yep. Perfect example. LOL
I do believe that he was not the only one.
Who is he trying to impress? I would be more impressed if he actually did his job. LOL
He spent his entire half-hour talking about "dark money."
And then Teh Ted took him down. It was a beautiful thing to watch.
-
Mazie Hirano called Barrett's use of the word "preference" offensive:
Hirono grills Amy Coney Barrett for describing sexual orientation as a ‘preference’
“I have no agenda,” Barrett replied. “I do want to be clear that I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference.”
That choice of words prompted swift pushback from some critics, who said that the phrase “sexual preference,” as used by Barrett, suggested that same-sex attraction is simply a choice — one that can be changed under enough pressure.
Among those raising concern was Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), who accused the judge of using the phrase intentionally, instead of the more widely accepted “sexual orientation."
“It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice,” the senator said in an exchange that swiftly went viral. “It is not. Sexual orientation is a key part of a person’s identity.”
Barrett was quick to apologize. “I certainly didn’t mean and would never mean to use a term that would cause any offense in the LGBTQ community,” she said.
