Posted on 03/31/2022 4:49:17 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Judges of federal courts are some of the most intellectually elite minds in the country, but they still can't get their facts straight.
It’s difficult to have much faith in the judicial system when individual judges appear to be gullible consumers of fake news, swallowing media accounts of events that have been widely questioned and, at least in some cases, debunked completely.
Just how gullible and uninformed even top jurists can be was seen in January at the U.S. Supreme Court, during oral arguments over the government’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate affecting nearly 100 million workers.
During the arguments, the justices revealed an ignorance of the basic facts surrounding COVID that shocked onlookers – and showed that many relied upon unreliable media sources for their information.
"We have hospitals that are almost at full capacity with people severely ill on ventilators,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor blurted out at one point. “We have over 100,000 children, which we've never had before, in serious condition, many on ventilators.”
In fact, according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the seven-day average of pediatric hospitalizations for COVID at that time was only around 3,700.
That a Supreme Court justice could be so uninformed – involving an issue that affected 100 million workers and the entire U.S. economy – highlighted for many the danger of Big Tech control of information and the media.
The issue of judicial ignorance and outright bias arose again this week with another boomer federal judge, U.S District Judge David Carter, who issued a finding that former President Donald Trump “more likely than not" committed felony obstruction in the effort to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Just because a person is brilliant in their field of expertise does not mean they are wise people. I have known so many of these in my life. Like a brilliand semiconductor research physicist and professor who I once worked for whose wife had to drive everywhere he went because he did not pay enough attention to find his way home and could never remember which color light it was that you should stop for and which you should go. There were three colors...so arbitrary.
Just imagine being on a jury, sitting through a whole trial, and then when it’s time for judgment simply saying, “I saw it on the news — this sucker is guilty as hell”.
I think the judge would prefer less focus on the news, more focus on actual evidentiary proceedings. But maybe judges get to play by different rules.
.
An ideologically consistent media has more power than the legislature, because the media controls who is suitable to be elected, what topics are considered important, what items are scandals, and what are not.
The USA has had an ideologically Progressive media for decades, partly because FDR used the FCC to stack the deck of the radio networks when the FCC was created during his first term.
The radio networks became the television networks.
We have been under the thumb of a mediacracy since then, and the mediacracy turned against the USA in the middle 1960's.
Progressives have always considered the Constitution irrelevant, at best, something to be "worked around".
Some of the stupidest people I’ve ever known were brilliant doctors; superb practitioners of medicine, but in capable of changing a light bulb.
“Judges of federal courts are some of the most intellectually elite minds in the country”.🐄💩
How do you think we got “gay” marriage? Judges are idiots and trust the media.
most judges are just tyrants or terrorists in black robes, nothing more, and are far from “brilliant” in any way.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.