If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SacBee)   In a stunning departure from routine, the Senate blocks an Obama appointee   (sacbee.com) divider line 77
    More: Asinine, President Obama, appointees, legal representation, Fraternal Order of Police, Chief Justice John Roberts, Mumia Abu-Jamal, D-Ill, Pat Toomey  
•       •       •

1287 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Mar 2014 at 5:05 PM (28 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



77 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-05 07:48:09 PM

X-boxershorts: Tell me now, how that Adegbile him from public service.


Cripes...FARK editing is such a beeeeyotch too...

Tell me now how filing that brief disqualifies Adegbile from public service?

What was in that brief that was filed well after the death sentence that was thrown out that was SOOOOOooooOOOOOOoooooOOOOOOooooo Offensive as to disqualify this guy from public service?
 
2014-03-05 07:50:36 PM

jso2897: MJMaloney187: jso2897: MJMaloney187: deeyablo: We get it...

No, I don't get the impression that many of you people do.

When Adegbile was acting director of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, he played a pivotal role in getting Abu-Jamal's 1981 death sentence overturned. Had Adegbile been nominated, Abu-Jamal would be strutting down the street a week later, just like Marshal Conway.

Abu-Jamal shot a 25 year old cop, Daniel Faulkner, in the back. Then in the chest. Then in the head. There were four eye witnesses. He should still be on death row. Period.

Well, it's nice to see that somebody isn't concerned with the loss of our personal freedoms in America.
Pillorying a defense attorney for doing his job?
Sure, why not - the guy he defended was, like, really icky!!
Jesus wept.

Adegbile didn't represent Abu-Jamal at trial. Abu-Jamal chose to represent himself, which the judge agreed to initially but revoked because Abu-Jamal has the brain of a child and kept disrupting the process with animal noises. I'm surprised you would reflexively defend the "personal freedoms" of a brutal murderer.

I'm not. I'm defending his, your, and my right to a competent defense when charged with a crime.


That really nice. Thank you. But in the real world, the only people that deserve a competent defense are the ones who can afford to pay a lawyer. Otherwise, you probably shouldn't shoot a cop in the back in front of witnesses.
 
2014-03-05 07:53:12 PM

MJMaloney187: jso2897: MJMaloney187: jso2897: MJMaloney187: deeyablo: We get it...

No, I don't get the impression that many of you people do.

When Adegbile was acting director of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, he played a pivotal role in getting Abu-Jamal's 1981 death sentence overturned. Had Adegbile been nominated, Abu-Jamal would be strutting down the street a week later, just like Marshal Conway.

Abu-Jamal shot a 25 year old cop, Daniel Faulkner, in the back. Then in the chest. Then in the head. There were four eye witnesses. He should still be on death row. Period.

Well, it's nice to see that somebody isn't concerned with the loss of our personal freedoms in America.
Pillorying a defense attorney for doing his job?
Sure, why not - the guy he defended was, like, really icky!!
Jesus wept.

Adegbile didn't represent Abu-Jamal at trial. Abu-Jamal chose to represent himself, which the judge agreed to initially but revoked because Abu-Jamal has the brain of a child and kept disrupting the process with animal noises. I'm surprised you would reflexively defend the "personal freedoms" of a brutal murderer.

I'm not. I'm defending his, your, and my right to a competent defense when charged with a crime.

That really nice. Thank you. But in the real world, the only people that deserve a competent defense are the ones who can afford to pay a lawyer. Otherwise, you probably shouldn't shoot a cop in the back in front of witnesses.


I see.
 
2014-03-05 08:11:30 PM

Old enough to know better: I gotta give the President credit. I would have thrown up my hands, yelled "fark you people" and gone home a long time ago.


It's not too late
 
2014-03-05 08:17:56 PM

MJMaloney187: jso2897: MJMaloney187: deeyablo: We get it...

No, I don't get the impression that many of you people do.

When Adegbile was acting director of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, he played a pivotal role in getting Abu-Jamal's 1981 death sentence overturned. Had Adegbile been nominated, Abu-Jamal would be strutting down the street a week later, just like Marshal Conway.

Abu-Jamal shot a 25 year old cop, Daniel Faulkner, in the back. Then in the chest. Then in the head. There were four eye witnesses. He should still be on death row. Period.

Well, it's nice to see that somebody isn't concerned with the loss of our personal freedoms in America.
Pillorying a defense attorney for doing his job?
Sure, why not - the guy he defended was, like, really icky!!
Jesus wept.

Adegbile didn't represent Abu-Jamal at trial. Abu-Jamal chose to represent himself, which the judge agreed to initially but revoked because Abu-Jamal has the brain of a child and kept disrupting the process with animal noises. I'm surprised you would reflexively defend the "personal freedoms" of a brutal murderer.


There's a very important (to everyone) distinction here that I think is being lost. He's not defending the personal freedoms of a brutal murderer. While the accused was on trial, he was innocent (until proven guilty) and in order for our justice system to function every accused citizen is entitled to a fair trial. What trial can be considered fair when the accused can't get a competent defense?

We so casually toss aside the concept of innocent until proven guilty, but it is one of the cornerstones of our nation. That is one of only two things that make the U.S. truly unique in the world (separation of Church and State being the other). Every defendant is entitled to a proper defense, no matter how despicable the accused or how heinous the alleged crime. If we ignore that facet of our judicial system, we might as well do like the rest of the world and place the burden of proof on the accused, presuming guilt until proven otherwise.
 
2014-03-05 08:22:02 PM

cptjeff: Bork was extreme


In your opinion. So, you see, it always comes down to whose ox is being gored. As with the person we're talking about now, a very vocal PR campaign shot down his nomination, so effectively that we can now say that Adegibile was "borked".
 
2014-03-05 08:50:01 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: cptjeff: Bork was extreme

In your opinion. So, you see, it always comes down to whose ox is being gored. As with the person we're talking about now, a very vocal PR campaign shot down his nomination, so effectively that we can now say that Adegibile was "borked".


Well, actually, there was a pretty significant majority of the Senate at the time that agreed with that assessment.
 
2014-03-05 08:54:12 PM

MJMaloney187: That really nice. Thank you. But in the real world, the only people that deserve a competent defense are the ones who can afford to pay a lawyer. Otherwise, you probably shouldn't shoot a cop in the back in front of witnesses.


Well, okay... As long as we can vote on who deserves equal protection...

Are you listening to yourself?
 
2014-03-05 09:43:00 PM

X-boxershorts: Adolf Oliver Nipples: cptjeff: Bork was extreme

In your opinion. So, you see, it always comes down to whose ox is being gored. As with the person we're talking about now, a very vocal PR campaign shot down his nomination, so effectively that we can now say that Adegibile was "borked".

Well, actually, there was a pretty significant majority of the Senate at the time that agreed with that assessment.


Amazing what happens when Teddy Kennedy and the National Organization of Women put the hit on you, isn't it? Same same here, except this time it was the Fraternal Order of Police.
 
2014-03-05 10:07:23 PM
I've never understood why the wife is more upset at the defense attorneys rather than the judge who bungled the jury instructions, resulting in the death penalty being taken off the table.
 
2014-03-05 10:18:42 PM

MJMaloney187: Otherwise, you probably shouldn't shoot a cop in the back in front of witnesses.


Well, they do it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant

Cops aren't 'special'. They don't deserve to live more than the rest of us.
 
2014-03-05 10:39:25 PM

I guess it could be worse when you consider what happens to to other attorneys who represented killers.

jeweell.com

 
2014-03-05 10:47:28 PM
You ever hear the story about LeBron James and the 5'1 120 lb 13 year old.  It seems they had a one on one pick up game and everyone thought LeBron was going to win because, you know, it's a slam dunk so to speak.

Then a funny thing happened.  LeBron threw sand in the guy's eyes and tied his hands behind his back and, to make absolutely sure, glued his sneakers to the basketball court floor.  And he won big.  People said, "Wow, LeBron was going to win anyway why did he have to cheat so bad?"

Now, in this situation, Lebron is the Philadelphia police/DA/Judge and the 5'1 guy is Mumia Abu-Jamal.  It was a slam dunk case that they were easily going to win because Abu-Jamal did it and was caught dead to rights.  Yet they were still cheating like hell during the trial.  That kind of corruption in a trial always needs to come to light or we don't stand a chance as a nation with the rule of law.
 
2014-03-05 10:48:22 PM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: X-boxershorts: Adolf Oliver Nipples: cptjeff: Bork was extreme

In your opinion. So, you see, it always comes down to whose ox is being gored. As with the person we're talking about now, a very vocal PR campaign shot down his nomination, so effectively that we can now say that Adegibile was "borked".

Well, actually, there was a pretty significant majority of the Senate at the time that agreed with that assessment.

Amazing what happens when Teddy Kennedy and the National Organization of Women put the hit on you, isn't it? Same same here, except this time it was the Fraternal Order of Police.


And your point is what?

That huge cross sections of America were offended by Bork's judicial record?

It is well taken, thank you.
 
2014-03-05 11:01:16 PM

X-boxershorts: Adolf Oliver Nipples: X-boxershorts: Adolf Oliver Nipples: cptjeff: Bork was extreme

In your opinion. So, you see, it always comes down to whose ox is being gored. As with the person we're talking about now, a very vocal PR campaign shot down his nomination, so effectively that we can now say that Adegibile was "borked".

Well, actually, there was a pretty significant majority of the Senate at the time that agreed with that assessment.

Amazing what happens when Teddy Kennedy and the National Organization of Women put the hit on you, isn't it? Same same here, except this time it was the Fraternal Order of Police.

And your point is what?

That huge cross sections of America were offended by Bork's judicial record?

It is well taken, thank you.


No, the point is that when organizations with clout oppose your nomination, you're going to lose, whatever else your qualifications are.
 
2014-03-05 11:30:43 PM

nmrsnr: FTFA: "Today, as my husband lies 33 years in his grave, his killer has become a wealthy celebrity," she wrote.

I can't begin to imagine what it's like to lose a loved one in the line, but the killer is in prison for life, and until recently was on death row, I'm not sure what else you could really ask for.


The Widow Faulkner has become as big an attention whore as Mumia.  Sadly and irritatingly, the local population of mouth-breathers who blindly support the local PD no matter how corrupt they become, eat her up with a spoon.

Mumia was guilty, but a certain poster in this thread is lying: there were no witnesses to the shooting.  The case was entirely circumstantial, and the death penalty should never have been on the table.  Even the notion that it was Murder 1 is debatable.
 
2014-03-06 12:17:47 AM
I love it when Democrats act exactly like Republicans.

I LOVE IT I LOVE IT GODDAMMIT
 
2014-03-06 12:38:11 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: cptjeff: Bork was extreme

In your opinion. So, you see, it always comes down to whose ox is being gored. As with the person we're talking about now, a very vocal PR campaign shot down his nomination, so effectively that we can now say that Adegibile was "borked".


Bork was, and still is, freaken nuts.
 
2014-03-06 01:00:13 AM
upload.wikimedia.org
Frowns on these shenanigans
 
2014-03-06 05:14:32 AM

geek_mars: Every defendant is entitled to a proper defense, no matter how despicable the accused or how heinous the alleged crime.


My opinion is the more despicable and heinous the alleged crime, the more important it is the defendant has competent defense: otherwise you are increasing the chance of a despicable and heinous criminal left free to commit more crimes if the first person being charged with the crime is incorrectly found guilty (even aside from the obvious issue of imprisoning/executing the wrong guy)
 
2014-03-06 11:11:13 AM
I think that the issue isn't that he defended the murderer but rather that he was such an apologist and cheerleader for the murderer.
 
2014-03-06 12:38:09 PM
the CONgress blocking that Socialist-giving-all-our-wealth-to-the-sheeple Obama, blocking him????


man, i need to write that in the calendar.
 
2014-03-06 12:44:45 PM

TofuTheAlmighty: Defend someone accused of an awful crime? You'd better not ever have aspirations to higher office.


You left out "Volunteered to".
 
2014-03-06 02:34:38 PM

WelldeadLink: TofuTheAlmighty: Defend someone accused of an awful crime? You'd better not ever have aspirations to higher office.

You left out "Volunteered to".


Well, he never actually participated in the defense. He filed an AMicus Brief with a Batson claim of racial bias in the sentencing trial that got Abu Jamal the death sentence.

The Batson claim was turned down but the death sentence was tossed anyways.

The Widow is making claims that Adegbile was out there vocally proclaiming support for AbuJamal but no one's brought any concrete proof of this forward. What's more likely is that some of Adegbile's staff were out there trumpeting the claims of police prejudice (It is Philly so not an outlandish claim) and the critics are tying this directly to Adegbile.
 
2014-03-06 03:20:57 PM

xria: geek_mars: Every defendant is entitled to a proper defense, no matter how despicable the accused or how heinous the alleged crime.

My opinion is the more despicable and heinous the alleged crime, the more important it is the defendant has competent defense: otherwise you are increasing the chance of a despicable and heinous criminal left free to commit more crimes if the first person being charged with the crime is incorrectly found guilty (even aside from the obvious issue of imprisoning/executing the wrong guy)


I get where you're coming from and I respect that opinion, but I don't entirely agree. I think all defendants and all charges should be viewed with equal weight (in terms of deserving competent defense). If we start coloring the charged and the charges with our own perceptions of the depth of their wrongness, we're only contributing our own bias in opposition to the idea of innocent until proven guilty. Whether someone is charged with petty theft or child molestation, they must be viewed as equally innocent until tried and proven otherwise. I know which of those crimes I consider worse, but there is no correlating level or degree of innocence, and that presumption of innocence must be kept entirely intact or our system of justice is just a stage production. At least, that's my opinion.
 
2014-03-06 10:28:19 PM

qorkfiend: max_pooper: doyner: I can understand the political reasons, so that's not what really bothered me.

The troubling thing was the rhetoric from the opponents; they chastised him for representing a murderer as a defense attorney.  This is absolutely beyond the pale.

The message there is that if you ever want to be appointed to serve the public, you need to avoid honoring our due process requirements rights at all costs lest you be labeled a supporter of cop killers.

The absolute LAST thing we need in this country is to undermine a defendant's right to representation in a court of law.


I guess the teatards need to start referring to John Adams* as a FFINO (Founding Father in Name Only).

*Provided defense and secured not guilty verdicts for the accused British soldiers from the Boston Massacre.

John Roberts provided pro bono legal representation to a man in Florida who had been convicted of killing eight people and was on death row. I don't recall hearing about that during either of his confirmation hearings.


"Here's the message we sent today," he said on the floor. "You young people listen up. If you are a young white person and you go to work for a law firm...and that law firm assigns you to a pro bono case to defend someone who killed 8 people in cold blood...My advice from what happened today is you should do that. As part of your legal obligation, as part of your profession. Because if you do that, who knows? You might wind up to be the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court."

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/03/06/3369041/harkin-adegbile/
 
2014-03-06 11:44:21 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: Again?

Maybe Fartbongo should start appointing manikins to the federal judiciary.


It'd be cheaper for him to appoint mannequins, since they don't have to be anatomically correct.
 
Displayed 27 of 77 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report