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.

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.

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!

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.....

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.

Horrific

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.

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 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

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??

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.

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???

Absolutely

what question didnt she answer?

Automatically!

@@bgbgbg123 Evasive

We need to see a three strike rule in place.

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.

Smugness?

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._

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._*

Filth seems to be the qualifier

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

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 .!

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...!

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?

Josh Hawley the traitor

@@josephcolubriale8591 Why?

Hawley is arguing she shouldnt have represented someone which would violate the constitutional rights of the accused.

@@bgbgbg123 ain't nothing like a bunch of GOP traitors speaking boss and order Satan is overjoyed

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.

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

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.

Noooope.

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.

Elect a Clown, Expect a Circus. #fjb.

@@jamescosby2343 well said

Wow! So brutal injustice to the victims and family! Inhumane!

he has all the rights until convicted and found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Are you stalin?

100%....if Terrance Williams was White the woman would have celebrated his death.

Watch out ! Your racism is showing.

End of the day if Terrance Williams was a White guy he would have been put to death 100% and the nominee would have cheered