Democrats in U.S. Senate block Obama civil rights lawyer

Comments (24)
sabrefencer wrote:

finally. republicans and dems working together, for all the people…you did right here…doesn’t it feel good, to remember, why All of you were elected…To serve all the people, with the best of your abilities..congrats

Mar 05, 2014 1:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

What?

A democrat limit to the extremes to which our radical Pres can go with his appointments?

Mar 05, 2014 1:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Wonder why they do not like this nominee?

@sabrefencer and unionwv, this is how the nomination process is supposed to work, not blocking people just because you do not agree with other policies of the President. BTW when you actually look at the vast majority of Obama’s nominees there where considered middle of the road just a few years ago, till those like you 2 jumped off the deep end.

Mar 05, 2014 2:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse

To add, I bet you two have no idea why they are blocking this guy who even what his credentials are.

Mar 05, 2014 2:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Now that they have updated article it states why they oppose. I could see why they would oppose this nominee for political reasons, but lawyers should NEVER be held accountable for the actions of their clients, unless they participated in said actions. Representing a guy that may have been wrongfully found guilty because of their race is not grounds for not accepting a nomination IMO, it is doing what a good defense attorney/civil rights attorney should do, even if the client is a vile disgusting bastard. According to our Constitution everyone has a right to legal representation.

Mar 05, 2014 3:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
worldcat wrote:

I’m glad to see this nomination blocked but disappointed that only 7 Democrats voted against Adegbile’s appointment. That smells of too many Dems voting the party line and I don’t it when either side of the aisle votes that way.

Mar 05, 2014 3:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sabrefencer wrote:

also, I guess they don’t like lawyers that defend cop killers…

Mar 05, 2014 3:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@USAPragmatist2

His Supreme Court pick was nothing close to middle of the road. His pick was as far left as Clarence Thomas is far right. You have gone so far left recently you wouldn’t know the difference as any position in opposition to you is immediately claimed as right wing lunacy. You and Bakhtin both.

Mar 05, 2014 3:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@USAPragmatist2

“”But lawyers are responsible for their own actions. In this case, the nominee inserted his office in an effort to turn reality on its head, impugn honorable and selfless law enforcement officers, and glorify an unrepentant cop-killer,” McConnell said.”

That is why it is opposed… The lawyers went after the law enforcement to try and get the defendent freed. Personally I say it is fair game. Law enforcement has no problem portraying citizens as criminals and low lifes. I have no problem with the law enforcement being portrayed as beign corrupt, kid killers, extortionists, bullies, rednecks, and racists. Many of them are. I support this nomination.

Mar 05, 2014 3:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ryandward wrote:

This seems overzealous, all defense attorneys represent unsavory people. That’s the point of their job.

Mar 05, 2014 3:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Robertbill wrote:

Thank you for mentioning what a lot of the U.S. media has just sort of forgotten today, that the Democrats control the majority vote in the Senate and that a simple majority would have put Obama’s stooge in place.

Mar 05, 2014 3:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TeamMcCalla wrote:

What?!? You criticize a nominee for doing his job? Lawyers MUST zealously defend their clients.

Have defense attorneys been confirmed as federal judges? Of course. And, haven’t those judges represented guilty criminals in their former lives as defense attorneys. Yes. Have they upheld every ethical standard in defending the accused? You bet.

Would such lawyers also be good at being head of the Department of Justice? Yes.

What about lawyers who sign up to jobs that require them to protect civil rights of those accused? They sound like exactly the kind of judges and Justice Department officials we want. If I commit a crime and go to trial, should justice department and the judge consider and protect my civil rights? Yes, without a doubt.

Should defense lawyers who have shown a commitment to civil rights be judges or officials at the justice department? According to these particular Senators, the answer should be NO.

They should just be honest about it and say they don’t like him. It has nothing to do with representing a defendant who was subsequently convicted of a crime.

Mar 05, 2014 3:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Talleywhacker wrote:

Lawyers can be appointed to represent defendants who do not have legal defense or funds to afford one.
This is not the same as selecting a defendant while practicing criminal law and charging large fees to get someone off sentencing.
Because someone once was assigned a case in which the defendant had allegedly killed a policeman is totally not the same as selecting the person to defend in a free choice setting like criminal law practice.
Such a mountain out of such a mole hill.
Evidently this is a highly qualified lawyer who can fill this post very well.

The GOP and some DEMS are looking for blemishes and zits with a Hubble telescope, and if they find anything- the nominee is automatically rejected as
defective- even if the finding is insignificant.

No wonder we are fiddling in the congress while the US burns- paraphrase-
getting no work done, no plans for future problems coming up, no plans for
remedying water safety after WV problems, no plans to rehab poor off food stamps like Clinton did, just keep on throwing paperwads across the aisle,
and trying to look important for the sake of just looking important.

Shallow, Despicable, Lack of sense, Lack of foresight, Treasonous, and many other things describe most of our elected officials. We are in for Doom.

Mar 05, 2014 3:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RapidRoy wrote:

GOOD! This is good! The bicameral system is actually working today.

Mar 05, 2014 3:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

* You have gone so far left recently you wouldn’t know the difference as any position in opposition to you is immediately claimed as right wing lunacy. You and Bakhtin both.*

I know – it totally confused him when the DNC wasn’t ‘working in tandem’ on this one. Some in the DNC actually took a stand on principle and it confused the heck out of this particular partisan.

But does it make it a bit more clear to people…?

Why you should NEVER be a partisan and just ‘go along’ with a party? That was the cause of the atrocities in Nazi Germany – because people were BLINDLY following a party and never questioning it. Have we not learned from history?

Just think for yourselves people.

I was a blind partisan at one point myself – but I’m smarter than that now. You can be too.

Mar 05, 2014 4:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
clsgis wrote:

Outside the US, Mumia Abu-Jamal is famous as one of our country’s most obvious political prisoners.
He was a newspaper reporter, reporting on corruption and human rights violations by the Philadelphia PD. So they framed him up to get him off the case. All of the witnesses against him were paid police “informants,” and all but one has recanted.
Inside our corporate media bubble, he’s famous as a “cop killer.”

Mar 05, 2014 4:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jhdale wrote:

It’s worth noting that, after the Boston Massacre, a certain John Adams was engaged to represent the British soldiers in court. About which he said:

“The Part I took in Defence of Cptn. Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested Actions of my whole Life, and one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country.”

And how did the country treat him for defending the British in this case? He was elected to be our second president.

Our legal system depends on providing adequate representation to all defendents, no matter how heinous their crimes. It is deeply troubling to see someone punished for carrying out this duty.

Mar 05, 2014 4:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse

@sabrefencer, You may notice I commented directly on article also, but I am going to continue to call you and others out for their mis-truths, hyperbole and hate. If you do not want to be called out, then come back to reality. BTW I am not a lawyer, probably should have been one(I have a very logical mind and the law is all logic), but I went into software engineering/IT instead.

@TheNewWorld, when I first posted the article was simply about them blocking had no info on why, then it was updated. I am not sure who you are talking about, Kagan or Sotamayer(spelling)?, anyhow most legal scholars would disagree with you on their ‘extremism’. Lastly I am glad you agree with me that this nominee should not be judged for doing the job of an attorney.

@overcast, you say ‘Why you should NEVER be a partisan and just ‘go along’ with a party? That was the cause of the atrocities in Nazi Germany – because people were BLINDLY following a party and never questioning it. Have we not learned from history?

Just think for yourselves people.’

I agree completely that is why one of my main goals is to expose the hyperbole, mis-truths and hate from other comments. and the article, however rare that is. That being said the vast majority of the hyperbole/mis-truths/hate comes from those more ‘right leaning’. It is rare as it is less often that a left leaning person does this, but I have corrected many ‘left leaning’ posters on this site also.

I also realize, unlike you, that yes they both suck, but to say both the GOP and the democrats are equally ‘sucky’ is just plain wrong, after all the right has jumped off the deep end since 2008.

Mar 05, 2014 5:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sabrefencer wrote:

@pragmatic, stick to your engineering..you are probably better at it….I think you just crave attention, by going after others in almost every article, you comment on…your perception as the lone ranger, righting every ones wrongs, just doesn’t cut it….you have been more wrong, than right..

Mar 05, 2014 5:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse

@sabrefencer, No I do not crave attention, what I crave is accuracy to the facts. As long as your statements are factual accurate you will have no problem with me, but as we have seen you seem to be more driven by hate then actual facts/reason. That being said I do not do it thinking that I will actually change the thinking of people like you, that is like trying to convince a devout Catholic that there is ZERO proof for the existence of a ‘god’ an exercise in futility, but I do it so those that do not know the truth wont be fooled by your comments that have no basis in reality.

Mar 05, 2014 6:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sabrefencer wrote:

@ pragmatist…hii ohhhh silver awayyyyyyyyyyyyy…crash. thud…ooops..stick to the drawing board…you wont fall off your horse so many times..

Mar 05, 2014 8:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GarrettF wrote:

NO way, time to vote all those communists out!!!!!!!! All those democrats need to be fed to starving zoo animals.

Mar 05, 2014 8:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gingerALEsoda wrote:

@USAPragmatist2 I appreciate your posts and attempts at exposing the hyperbole, mis-truths and flat out hate constantly and relentlessly on display from our far-right brethren. It never ceases to amaze me the depths they will go to discredit and denounce anything that doesn’t fit their narrative: Obama is the worst, most despicable, weak, ect. ect. blah, blah person that ever existed in history of civilization. Listen to talk radio for one hour and it becomes clear that our far-right friends are looney tunes right about now.
They seem to be totally willing to dismiss fact or logic.
One of the basic principles of this great country is our respect for Justice.
Mr. Adegbile is a civil rights attorney. It is his job to make sure our justice system is working as fair and lawful as possible. Even the most despicable defendant is due, according to our Constitution, a right to competent legal representation.
So Yeah, the nut jobs in Congress blocked a nominee for following a basic principle of the U.S Constitution. And our fellows on the Right cheer and clap under the ignorance of their irrational and honestly just weird hate fixation for the President. They think this hurts him. Disgraceful but expected, sadly.

Mar 05, 2014 9:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Robertbill wrote:

Pretending that a former member of the Black Panthers and current functionary of the NAACP, bot black supremacist organizations is dedicated to civil rights is a farce.

Mar 05, 2014 11:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.