Another Unqualified Judge Orders Trump Off The Ballot In Illinois

[DeluxAuto]

She's a political judge.

Judges are elected.

She's a political judge.

Every judge is a political judge.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Since when has Rightguide ever claimed to be making rulings or claimed to be a judge?

When did anyone claim that Reichguide claimed that?

 

[TastySuckToy]

When did anyone claim that Reichguide claimed that?

My comment was in response to someone pointing out Rightguide isn't a judge.

It's a complete Red Herring regarding his arguments.

 

[Bn2f]

What I find interesting is how the leftists around here will bow down and worship the judges and judgements passed down by them, invoking their legal authority without question, so long as it targets someone like Trump they personally hate.

Imagine if they held such standards for other legal authorities, like the police.

I will give you credit for lately finding a niche space on the PB that’s been unoccupied. It’s admirable that you’re now the Tucker Carlson replicant ‘just asking questions’ bot. It would be well and good and possibly even be pulled off had you no previous history here. With responses like this it’s clear you’re not learning anything from the questions you’ve posed because you don’t care to. You’re still a sea-lioning practitioner even if you’re asking the side you wholeheartedly agree with and support.

 

[DeluxAuto]

My comment was in response to someone pointing out Rightguide isn't a judge.

It's a complete Red Herring regarding his arguments.

It's not a red herring if you've been here long enough to know how often Reichguide is wrong about almost everything.

 

[ll74]

She's ruled in ignorance of the law and ignorant of her authority under it. That means to me she's not qualified to be a judge. She's a political judge.

You don't decide whether she's qualified.

 

[TastySuckToy]

It's not a red herring if you've been here long enough to know how often Reichguide is wrong about almost everything.

Someone being right or wrong is not the determination by which you label someone a judge or waste time pointing out they aren't one.

 

[ll74]

Someone being right or wrong is not the determination by which you label someone a judge or waste time pointing out they aren't one.

You may want to look at the OP to see who is actually doing that.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You don't decide whether she's qualified.

Rightguide isn't deciding the issue, he's expressing his opinion on it.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Another whiny post by a triggered trumptard.

Imagine if rightguide had a job or a family and put as much effort into them as he does copy and pasting articles here..

 

[Rightguide]

You don't decide whether she's qualified.

Her decision ranks her competence and I have every right to comment on it or the lack thereof.

 

[Rightguide]

It's not a red herring if you've been here long enough to know how often Reichguide is wrong about almost everything.

Like what?

 

[ll74]

Rightguide isn't deciding the issue, he's expressing his opinion on it.

He's saying that the judge is unqualified to be an actual judge. That's not an opinion on the ruling.... Lol

 

[Rightguide]

He's saying that the judge is unqualified to be an actual judge. That's not an opinion on the ruling.... Lol

It is an opinion based on her ignorant ruling.

 

[ll74]

Her decision ranks her competence and I have every right to comment on it or the lack thereof.

Saying the judge is incompetent is not the same thing as saying that they are unqualified for the position they hold. One is a comment on their performance while the other is a comment on whether they meet the job requirements.

The issue, as always with your threads, is that you can't tell the difference.

 

[ll74]

It is an opinion based on her ignorant ruling.

Saying you disagree with her ruling is an opinion on her ruling. Saying she is unqualified to be a judge is another thing entirely.

 

[YDB95]

It came from your post, d’oh.
Don’t you read ‘em?

Based on my experience, I think he reads them but doesn't understand them. On one memorable occasion, he not only posted a link that said the exact opposite of what he was arguing, he also quoted the exact line that did that. So on that occasion at least, he had read his cite, but had missed the meaning of it entirely.

This time around, though, he's not getting the meaning wrong, he's denying the very existence of that line (which is there - I saw it too). So perhaps this time he really didn't read it.

 

[Rightguide]

Saying you disagree with her ruling is an opinion on her ruling. Saying she is unqualified to be a judge is another thing entirely.

So you believe that a judge is establishing her competence by ruling with complete ignorance of the law in question? Of course, you do, because in your mind she is doing the correct political thing. The legal thing means nothing to you.

 

[ll74]

So you believe that a judge is establishing her competence by ruling with complete ignorance of the law in question? Of course, you do, because in your mind she is doing the correct political thing. The legal thing means nothing to you.

She ruled how she saw fit to rule, as is her right to do as a judge. Her qualifications are based on state laws.

Judges don't need to agree with you to be qualified.

And the court system has a process and she followed it... As will SCOTUS when they rule on the matter. I don't consider her ruling to be incorrect based on the legal and political questions being posed currently regarding Trump's qualifications. And I also am fairly certain that SCOTUS will reverse the ruling.

But none of my opinion has anything to do with her qualifications as judge.

 

[Rightguide]

She ruled how she saw fit to rule, as is her right to do as a judge. Her qualifications are based on state laws.

Judges don't need to agree with you to be qualified.

And the court system has a process and she followed it... As will SCOTUS when they rule on the matter.

I think she qualifies for a Bar complaint.

 

[ll74]

I think she qualifies for a Bar complaint.

Feel free to seek one for her.

 

[TastySuckToy]

I think she qualifies for a Bar complaint.

Are those difficult to obtain? Sure seems like the current US justice system is ripe pickings for such things, but I'm not seeing it happen.

 

[Rightguide]

She ruled how she saw fit to rule, as is her right to do as a judge. Her qualifications are based on state laws.

Judges don't need to agree with you to be qualified.

And the court system has a process and she followed it... As will SCOTUS when they rule on the matter. I don't consider her ruling to be incorrect based on the legal and political questions being posed currently regarding Trump's qualifications. And I also am fairly certain that SCOTUS will reverse the ruling.

But none of my opinion has anything to do with her qualifications as judge.

Her ruling was stupid, politically oriented, and without a legal foundation.

 

[Rightguide]

Feel free to seek one for her

She's another Fani Willis who is now facing a couple of bar complaints as we speak for her violations of ethics in pursuit of an ill-founded political witch hunt against Donald Trump with the help of the Biden White House.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Like what?

Where should I start? With the election fraud thread?