Anonymous ID: e133a9 Feb. 24, 2019, 12:22 p.m. No.5364346   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>4380

Democrats Take Down Another Judicial Nominee Simply Because He’s A Christian

Religious tests are unacceptable––we should never let people of faith be automatically disqualified from public service due to their closely held beliefs.

 

In Wisconsin, this campaign of religious intolerance has claimed a new casualty in Gordon Giampietro, President Trump’s former nominee to a vacant seat on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. He was revealed to be removed from the list of renominations Trump issued on January 22. Democrats have all but ensured that, for the crime of publicly voicing the teachings of his faith, Giampietro will never sit on the federal bench.

 

A number of Senate Democrats have famously come to the conclusion that Catholics faithful to the teachings of their church are unfit for public service. In September 2017, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) bizarrely complained that “the dogma lives loudly within” Judge Amy Coney Barrett, suggesting that her faith precludes her service on the bench.

 

In December 2018, presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D-CA) shamefully attempted to make membership in the Knights of Columbus, a renowned Catholic charitable organization, a disqualifying offense. One can apparently be a Catholic, but ought not to be too serious about it.

 

That this nonsense has now claimed Giampietro is a shame. His qualifications are beyond question. An assistant general counsel at a Fortune 500 company, he has more than a decade’s experience as a federal prosecutor after becoming a partner at one of Wisconsin’s most successful law firms. He received the approval of the bipartisan Wisconsin Federal Nominating Commission (on which one of us sat), of Wisconsin Sens. Ron Johnson (R) and Tammy Baldwin (D), and of the American Bar Association, which awarded him an official rating of “qualified.”

 

But that was before BuzzFeed reported that Giampietro was an unapologetically orthodox Catholic, quoting remarks he had made on Catholic radio criticizing same-sex marriage and birth control and a comment he had posted in response to an article on a Catholic website lamenting that the “original sin” of slavery had spawned a modern legacy of race-based decision-making.

 

Although his views on same-sex marriage and birth control reflect the official teaching of a church with more than 1 billion members worldwide (and his views on affirmative action are well within the mainstream of conservative legal thought), Giampietro had made the mistake of sharing his thoughts outside the recesses of his home. That gave the left the hook it needed.

 

“Oh Look, Another One of Trump’s Court Picks Is Really Anti-Gay,” sneered a HuffPost headline. A prominent Madison newspaper branded Giampietro “entirely unacceptable.” The Human Rights Campaign quickly pushed out a glossy attack ad urging viewers to contact their senators and tell them “to block a lifetime appointment for Gordon Giampietro.”

 

Critics settled on two narratives. The first was that Giampietro had failed to make necessary disclosures to the nominating commission. That is patently false. He provided everything he was asked for and no one on the commission could have been surprised by his religious views.

 

Far more pernicious was the claim that his views meant he could not be an impartial judge, the corollary being that no faithful Catholic is qualified to serve in the federal judiciary. Wisconsin’s five bishops penned an open letter to Baldwin, who held the power to effectively sink Giampietro’s nomination by withholding her “blue slip” (essentially a senatorial letter of approval). The bishops insisted—and how sad that it even needed saying—that “Catholics are capable of offering fair and impartial decisions when applying the law.” They pleaded with Baldwin to give Giampietro a chance.

 

It would have been quite a symbol of magnanimity, open-mindedness, and statesmanship had Baldwin, the first openly gay individual elected to the U.S. Senate, at least granted Giampietro a hearing before her colleagues and the rest of the country. Instead, in an open letter addressed to President Trump, Baldwin reneged on her previous recommendation, stating that she was no longer supporting Giampietro. With Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, honoring the blue-slip tradition for district court nominees—essentially permitting home-state senators to block a nominee from receiving a vote—Baldwin ended Giampietro’s nomination.

http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/22/democrats-take-another-judicial-nominee-simply-hes-christian/

 

Catholic judges are a no-go BUT racist, POS Muslims Reps are a-okay with freaking DemonRats!

Anonymous ID: e133a9 Feb. 24, 2019, 12:27 p.m. No.5364416   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Suburban women want the wall, buoying Trump after fleeing in 2018

The reason: many want his border wall.

 

A remarkable new Zogby Analytics poll found that suburban women, more than likely voters, support the wall and Trump’s emergency declaration that will allow him to spend more to build it than Congress has OK’d.

 

The numbers: 45 percent of suburban women want the president to find other sources of money to build the border wall, versus 40 percent who don’t. And 50 percent back his emergency declaration.

 

“Even though most voters do not agree with the president's recent actions regarding the border, suburban women do favor his policies. A plurality of suburban women want the president to get funding elsewhere to complete the border fence and half support him declaring a national emergency to do so,” said pollster Jonathan Zogby who gave Secrets an advance look at the results.

 

“As the 2020 presidential election inches closer, Trump will look to strengthen his support among his base and appeal to swing voter blocs, such as, suburban women. The ‘border wall’ or ‘border fence’ will be a key issue he can utilize to help his re-election chances, especially as his Democratic opponents move further to the left regarding immigration policies,” he added.

 

His latest survey found that Trump’s approval has continued to edge higher, and he’s picking up support from other groups that had soured on the president, including Hispanics, African Americans and independents.

 

“The president's numbers steadily gained among Independents (39 percent approve/55 percent disapprove) and voters without college degrees (45 percent approve/51 percent disapprove), two groups that helped him win the 2016 presidential election. Another interesting area where President Trump gained ground was with Hispanics (40 percent approve/57 percent disapprove) and African Americans (24 percent approve/70 percent disapprove). Both groups' job approval rating of Trump increased the most in months,” said Zogby’s polling analysis.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/suburban-women-want-the-wall-buoying-trump-after-fleeing-in-2018