Dishonest Witness Pam Karlan, Latest Act at Impeachment Circus

[GURPS]

When I was an attorney at the Justice Department, I worked on a Voting Rights Act case that Karlan hated. Why? Because the victims of the racial discrimination were white. We proved our case and won, but that didn't matter to Karlan. She was still bitter that the Bush administration protected white people from racial discrimination against a black defendant election official.

She even peddled the nonsense in a published law review article. Karlan falsely wrote, “For five of the eight years of the Bush Administration, [they] brought no Voting Rights Act cases of its own except for one case protecting white voters.”

Karlan's sleight of hand might be interesting... if it were true. Sadly, for her credibility, it is demonstrably false, and she has never once corrected her false scholarship. Her fellow travelers never mention her falsehood and instead praise and elevate her, still.

This is demonstrably false; any visit to the DOJ website demonstrates this. Karlan says the Voting Section brought no cases to protect minorities under the Voting Rights Act in five of eight years -- let's look at the record:

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/dishonest-witness-pam-karlan-latest-act-at-impeachment-circus/

 

[glhs837]

Wait, so WTH did she testify to?

 

[Kyle]

Wait, so WTH did she testify to?

:ORANGEMANBAD:

 

[PrchJrkr]

Schift and the other cry babies have nothing on Trump, so they're wowing their blind faith followers with "experts" to impress them.

 

[This_person]

Wait, so WTH did she testify to?

That she hates Trump, and she heard that people said he did stuff wrong, so he should be tarred and feathered, um, that he should be drawn and quartered, that he should be impeached because anyone who says Trump did something wrong MUST be telling the truth. And, she hates him. She hates him SOOOOO much, so, he should be impeached.

Oh, she also testified that she's a shitty human being. She said, "Trump can name his son Baron, but he can't make him a Baron" which was met by her fellow two h8ers with chuckles, and met by any decent human being with contempt.

 

[officeguy]

Was that the one with the cheap shot against Barron ?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Was that the one with the cheap shot against Barron ?

Yep. If "he can name his son Barron but he can't make him one" is a cheap shot.

 

[stgislander]

With all the venom dripping from her "testimony", I'm not sure how anyone could take her seriously. Unfortunately she's just what the Dems wanted to hear.

 

[nutz]

That she hates Trump, and she heard that people said he did stuff wrong, so he should be tarred and feathered, um, that he should be drawn and quartered, that he should be impeached because anyone who says Trump did something wrong MUST be telling the truth. And, she hates him. She hates him SOOOOO much, so, he should be impeached.

Oh, she also testified that she's a shitty human being. She said, "Trump can name his son Baron, but he can't make him a Baron" which was met by her fellow two h8ers with chuckles, and met by any decent human being with contempt.

I was happy to watch Gaetz make her eat those words.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...ith-stanford-professor-it-makes-you-look-mean

 

[officeguy]

Yep. If "he can name his son Barron but he can't make him one" is a cheap shot.

Yes, that was a cheap shot. Why is that even a question in your mind ?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Yes, that was a cheap shot. Why is that even a question in your mind ?

Unnecessary in terms of the reason she was there, but hardly a "cheap shot", IMO. Especially considering where the bar is currently set in politics.

 

[officeguy]

Unnecessary in terms of the reason she was there, but hardly a "cheap shot", IMO. Especially considering where the bar is currently set in politics.

So the bar is set by a 13 year old kid. Got it.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

So the bar is set by a 13 year old kid. Got it.

Sure. If that's what you read.

 

[This_person]

Unnecessary in terms of the reason she was there, but hardly a "cheap shot", IMO. Especially considering where the bar is currently set in politics.

You let others set where your bar is?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

You let others set where your bar is?

Is there something in the water that is affecting people's vision and ability to read plain English?

 

[This_person]

Is there something in the water that is affecting people's vision and ability to read plain English?

What did you mean, then, when you said, “ Especially considering where the bar is currently set in politics.”?

 

[stgislander]

I always wanted to believe that in politics, minor children were off limits.

 

[officeguy]

I always wanted to believe that in politics, minor children were off limits.

Not for Chris. If it serves the higher good, dragging a kid into this is a-ok.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

What did you mean, then, when you said, “ Especially considering where the bar is currently set in politics.”?

Exactly what it says.

Don't act like what Pam said was some huge ground breakingly horrible thing considering the equally or more horrible things said by others in politics. Trump's entire campaign was a barrage of cheap shots. His presidency continues to be mired in cheap shots. Including alluding to the FBI using too many resources on the Russian collusion investigation leading to the school shooting in Florida. 3 days after the shooting happened. Parents weren't even done burying their kids before Trump took to Twitter to take jabs at the FBI.

But no. This "cheap shot" here is the end-all, be-all, right?

Wants kids and cheap shots to be out of politics? Don't condone and encourage it. Simple as that. But you don't. Not a single on of you will comment about @CPUSA telling another member to "slash [their] wrists and make the world a better place" SOLELY because they disagree politically. Not a single one of you have commented on the litany of other similar comments made to anonymous forum members who differ politically.

Like I said, considering how low the bar is in politics and political discussions in general, this is hardly a blip. But you all go on and be upset with the dog poop on the floor while the walls are covered with it.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Not for Chris. If it serves the higher good, dragging a kid into this is a-ok.

Bullshit. I've already said how I feel about it. Her comment served no meaningful purpose. She knows it and apologized for it.

There's no "higher good" that comes from those types of comments.