A tale of two judges - IOKIYAR
Let's get this straight.
In a case against a famous Republican, the initial presiding judge had to be replaced because he gave money to Democrats. This was due to a perceived conflict of interest in a case based on money exchanging hands by Republicans. Fair enough right? Right.
Now, a AMERICAblog: Because a great nation deserves the truthsoon to be famous Republican Judge, decides its OK to rule in three cases involving Investment firms (that happen to be managing said judge's money), as well as said judge's sister's law firm. As if this wasn't bad enough, he documented his agreement of recusal in a questionnaire that the Senate based its confirmation Pageant on. Still not convinced of the shittiness of all of this?
This judge submitted this questionnaire and backed it up Under Oath. Despite his lame excuses, shouldn't this be a cause for DEBARMENT? As in, you can no longer be a judge, let alone sit on the highest most powerful court in the land?
Senators please, if these three reasons are not enough to convince you that this man cannot not be trusted at his word, even under your quaint oath, perhaps this is a good enough reason to not give him the privilege Bush seeks to bestow upon him.