CBS challenges Hillary Clinton's unfair attack on Trump judges

Washington Free Beacon:
CBS correspondent Jan Crawford ripped twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Wednesday, calling her statement on judicial confirmations "wrong on multiple levels."

In response to Clinton claiming that Republican nominees had "no relevant experience," Crawford said the former secretary of state was trying to score "cheap political points."

"You may have an issue with Bush/Trump nominees, but they generally (and certainly relatively speaking) are qualified and experienced," Crawford wrote in a Twitter thread. "And no one should ever assume Republicans don’t take ‘seriously' the selection of judges."

"Dismissing those judges as political hacks is a disservice and cheapens our discourse. And a Yale-educated lawyer not looking to score cheap political points should know better," she added.
In a subsequent exchange with Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin, Crawford continued to defend Republican judicial choices.

"I said it was wrong to paint all these judges with a broad brush as unqualified, wrong to say Republicans don't take judges seriously. That is factual and something everyone should be aware of," she wrote.
I think the quality of Trump nominees for the courts has been stronger than I expected.  Democrats do not like them because they are more likely to follow the law and precedents than Democrat judges who are more results-oriented.


Popular posts from this blog

US, Britain and Israel help Iranian nuclear scientist escape

Iran loses another of its allies in Iraq

The Democrat screw up on the 80% rule for insurers