Posted on 09/13/2005 5:01:31 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
Q&A with Roberts to Start
On Tuesday, the eighteen members of the Senate Judiciary Cmte. begin questioning Chief Justice nominee John Roberts. This will take all day, with the senators asking their questions, up to a half-hour for each member, in order of seniority, alternating by party.
The Schedule (media advisory)
Tentative Schedule for the Hearing: Schedule is subject to change
Tuesday, Sept. 13
9:30 am Chairman Specter begins 30 minute round of questioning (Round 1)
1:00 pm Break for lunch
2:00 pm Resume questioning
6:00 pm Break for dinner
7:00 pm Resume questioning
8:30 pm Round 1 questioning ends
The Dem playbook
The Hill newspaper gives us a peek at the Democratic playbook for the Roberts hearings. Below are the attack assignments for the Democratic members of the Committee:
Kennedy -- civil rights
Leahy -- Bybee torture memo
Biden -- privacy, personal autonomyand the 9th Amendment
Kohl -- Property rights and civil liberties
Feinstein -- "judicial activism" and Roe vs. Wade
Feingold -- limits of executive powers
Schumer and Durbin have wisely refused to show their hand.
Via FromTheBleachers
LIVE LINKS
Senate Judiciary Committee webcast.
It's supposed to run again, starting at 9 EST.
We've raised hell over these liberal goons for yrs...now it's finally happening. They're losing their jobs 'cause 80% of Americans are conservatives...and NO ONE is watching them. Thank The Lord. Bottom line is $$$'s...overtime those liberal goons running the news networks have got to face their bottom lines. ;o)
yes, it's set resume again tomorrow at 9 am.
A poster some say has inside sources stated tomorrow was Chris' last day. No Thread. No confirmation other than that one post. Guess we'll find out.
I knew you didn't. I was just throwing my observations in. I was truly amazed at his almost total recall about each case. Like you stated; no notes, just rattled the answers off.
K Rove probably had him wired. :-)
I think you're right. I also think they were surprised by it.
That was the impression I got as well. I couldn't watch the hearings, but did keep checking this thread during the day. It seemed to me that the Dims didn't bring their best game today. There were none of the really scurrilous personal attacks that we've come to know and expect from the "Party of Love." I can only imagine that Matthews, Olberman and the rest of the MSM are just beet-faced with rage over the Dims' performance, and I'll bet DU is boiling over by now.
So, when will the Dims really bring out the heavy artillery?
LOL...was there a "bulge" under his jacket in back?
Thank you very much....
I hope tomorrow is as entertaining as today...I didn't get to see as much as would have liked to today...but, I thought it was fun...
Didn't you love what Roberts said in regard to International Law?
Well he has taken his show to NO...so I guess if he is going to go down, he is going down with the flooded city...lol
I cannot imagine WHY they would cancel his show...it had the highest ratings of ALL the evening shows.
Can you imagine how big Shep Smith's head is gonna get now...if he thinks he ran off Chrissy? whoa...
It was a fun day of TV compared to recent ones. The only thing I can imagine being more fun is when the Dems stack a 9/11 type Katrina commission hearing and then question Gen. Honore.
You didn't direct your question re: Internation Law to me, but THAT was one line of questioning that I have been waiting for someone to ask him....
Ever since I found out that Ginsberg and others DID use foreign law to help decide cases, I have been furious...
He took a lengthy, roundabout way to answer that he isn't in favor of using it, though.
Fort Worthless Jim Wright was the DemocRAT Speaker of the House who was caught when he published a book of his speaches, with many, many empty pages. It turned out that various unions bought thousands and thousands of copies, creating an illegal "contribution" to Wright. He resigned in disgrace.
The problem is they have no artillery against this man. He is the real deal, smart and articulate and a strict constitutionalist. They just are no match for his intellect and character.
Roberts said it has no place whatsoever in rulings by judges. He said a justice or judge uses international law to justify his/her opinion/ruling. When in fact, all that person is doing is writing laws from the bench to fit his ideology.
It's starting now. Do we go back to the beginning of this thread to follow along? lol
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.