Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And (read my previous post), still DOES NOT make it nepotism
I don't care what you call it, its a conflict of interest, and he lied about it. That alone should disqualify him for the job. You don't lie on your job application and expect to get hired.
On top of that, he is completely unqualified for the job, according to the BAR association, with absolutely zero judicial experience. But of course none of those things matter to the party of far right criminals.
Having zero experience and no qualifications but getting the job anyway? Sounds a lot like nepotism to me.
I guess no one here has ever had to fill out a conflict of interest declaration. And nope, "But Obama!" is not the correct answer.
But we already have many, many examples of Trump appointees who consider telling the truth a completely optional activity. The swamp is so full they've had to create a new one to hold all the scum.
So it turns out, the 36 year old lawyer picked for a federal judiciary position, who was unanimously rejected by the Bar Association as unqualified and who has such a right-wing bias he's unfit for the judiciary, was picked and approved by Trump/Republicans, because he's married to a senior White House Counsel lawyer.
This is so astronomically corrupt. Say what you want about Obama, but his Administration was never this openly corrupt and criminal. This isn't some limited administration position, it's a life-time term to a federal court, and people getting approved are only getting it because of their right-wing extremism and ties to the White House.
So disgusting. Republicans are truly the most corrupt people on the planet.
I don't care what you call it, its a conflict of interest, and he lied about it.
On top of that, he is completely unqualified for the job, according to the BAR association. But of course none of those things matter to the party of criminals.
Such is evident as you've been spewing false accusations (i.e. claiming that something is nepotism when its clearly not).
As for whether its a conflict of interest. So what? Conflicts of interest are not illegal or unethical. Its only how you handle actual conflicts of interest when they come up that would call matters into question. Thus, if confirmed, this conversation would only be relevant if the man was ruling/presiding over a case in which his wife had a substantial role in preparing (from the government's side). Under such a scenario, legal ethics and the law would require the man (should he be confirmed as a judge) to recuse himself in order to cure the conflict. But (and its clear you don't have a clue about matters) that would NEVER happen as the government is represented in court by the Department of Justice, not some obscure White House counsel who is not in a position to be working on legal strategy for defending the government against claims.
Moving along, you clearly didn't read the actual article either as you're falsely and hysterically claiming that the man lied about something when the evidence does not support such.
For instance, from the article:
Quote:
Mr. Talley was asked on his publicly released Senate questionnaire to identify family members and others who are “likely to present potential conflicts of interest.” He did not mention his wife.
As I explained a few paragraphs before, his wife is like NOT likely to present a potential conflict of interest if confirmed to serve as a judge.
Also:
Quote:
Mr. Talley also did not mention his wife when he described his frequent contact with White House lawyers during the nomination process.
This, likewise, is not a lie, or at least is open to legitimate debate. That question (and I've had to answer several variations of this question in my own career) refers to contact with White House lawyers about the nomination process during the process. It does not refer to just any contact with a White House lawyer, in this case with his wife, that is completely unrelated to the position. Unless you can prove that this man was in contact with his wife about the position, the you, like the New York Slime, are pushing more BS. MORE FUNDAMENTALLY, his wife is a chief of staff to the White House Counsel responsible for the administration of the White House Counsel office, NOT responsible for setting/shaping legal policy. Give it a rest.
I have pointed that out before, but the Leftists just ignore that little fact. They like their own "facts" better, and they make up rules of their own.
You do realize that this particular example (Bobby Kennedy) happened before the current laws? It wouldn't be cool if it happened now either.
So it turns out, the 36 year old lawyer picked for a federal judiciary position, who was unanimously rejected by the Bar Association as unqualified and who has such a right-wing bias he's unfit for the judiciary, was picked and approved by Trump/Republicans, because he's married to a senior White House Counsel lawyer.
This is so astronomically corrupt. Say what you want about Obama, but his Administration was never this openly corrupt and criminal.
LOL. Why is Kagan on the Supreme Court? It has nothing to do with merit. Same with Sotomayor.
Such is evident as you've been spewing false accusations (i.e. claiming that something is nepotism when its clearly not).
That's your opinion, and it is wrong. Having a wife in a position that you preside over as a judge, is a very large conflict of interest. No doubt Trump chose Brett Talley to fill the position precisely BECAUSE his wife worked for Trump. That is the very of definition of nepotism and corruption. There is no other reason for this nomination, because he sure didn't pick him for his qualifications and experience, of which he has absolutely none.
Amazing how conservatives are always complaining about Affirmative Action, when in reality unqualified white men are the ones who are always getting preference over more qualified women and minorities.
LOL. Why is Kagan on the Supreme Court? It has nothing to do with merit. Same with Sotomayor.
Do you have grounds to say why they're unqualified? Did the ABA state both of them are unqualified to be judges by unanimous ruling? Sotomayor was already a federal judge when was appointed. Kagan was Solicitor General.
Both have astounding credentials for the Supreme Court.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
