Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Post of the Week! | How To Invest
Search Politics
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Post of the Week! | How To Invest
Search Politics


Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (3) |
Post New
Author: PinotPete 🐝  😊 😞
Number: of 75964 
Subject: Stunning new report: DemandJustice
Date: 11/11/25 10:03 AM
Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 5
An extremely disturbing report was just release at https://demandjustice.org/judicial-noms-report-202...

Key Findings

The report reviews the written “Questions for the Record” (QFRs) submitted by 27 federal-judicial nominees in 2025 under the Trump administration.
Demand Justice

The central claim is that all 27 nominees gave answers about two pivotal events — the 2020 election and the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol — that were misleading or evasive rather than straightforward.
Demand Justice

The report finds that the language used by the nominees was strikingly uniform: many used identical or near-identical phrasing, avoided direct factual acknowledgment of what occurred, and relied on circuitous wording rather than direct statements of fact.

If you oppose this administration in any way, what do you think your outcome would be before these judges?

Pete
Print the post


Author: marco100   😊 😞
Number: of 75964 
Subject: Re: Stunning new report: DemandJustice
Date: 11/11/25 10:29 AM
Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 1
Pete,

The vast majority of legal cases involve issues of fact and law which have nothing at all to do with politics and nothing at all to do with Trump.
Print the post


Author: Lapsody   😊 😞
Number: of 75964 
Subject: Re: Stunning new report: DemandJustice
Date: 11/11/25 10:40 AM
Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 3

The central claim is that all 27 nominees gave answers about two pivotal events — the 2020 election and the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol — that were misleading or evasive rather than straightforward.


Typical. That happened with appointments to the USSC about abortion.
Print the post


Post New
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (3) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds