Up is Down
By on Feb 14th, 2005 at 3:41 pm
Up is Down
“I’ve a constitutional responsibility to nominate well-qualified men and women for the federal courts — I have done so.” — President Bush, 2/14/05
“Nominations Sent to the Senate…Thomas B. Griffith, of Utah, to be United States Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit” — White House Press Release, 2/14/05
“Thomas B. Griffith, President Bush’s nominee for the federal appeals court in Washington, has been practicing law in Utah without a state law license for the past four years, according to Utah state officials.” — Washington Post, 6/21/04
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Picky, picky! So, he doesn’t have a license to practice law. So, he isn’t really a lawyer. So……. Hey! I’ll bet he knows the “right” way to rule on any case that comes before him, even now.
February 14th, 2005 at 4:02 pmHe’s being nomintaed to be a judge, not a lawyer . . . duh!
February 14th, 2005 at 4:35 pmToo bad he doesn’t wear flight suits he could be nominated to pilot. Mission Accomplished!
The Entire Bush cabal cabinet and appointment is underqualified and overhyped.
February 14th, 2005 at 4:51 pmThe Bush administration does bother to check these things because it just doesn’t care.
The Gonzales nomination proved it has the votes to confirm anyone nominated regardless of qualifications.
February 14th, 2005 at 5:42 pmExtra Value Quote of the Day
February 14th, 2005 at 10:42 pm“I’ve a constitutional responsibility to nominate well-qualified men and women for the federal courts. I have done so.” — President Bush, earlier today, just before his nomination of Thomas B. Griffith to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the District of Colu…
He’s being nomintaed to be a judge, not a lawyer . . . duh! by David in Burbank  February 14th,
But should he be sitting in judgement over alleged criminals when his career for the past four years has been based on a crime? I wonder if he’d recuse himself if his court got a case about another lawyer practicing without a license.
February 15th, 2005 at 8:43 amIt really makes sense if you think about it. These guys, who are nothing more than criminals, and probably could not land a janitor job at McDonald’s if they really had to compete in the real world, will be nothing less than slavish in their devotion to their masters at BushCo. Screw the Constitution and rule of law! No independent judiciary here, no sir!!
February 15th, 2005 at 11:52 amCareful. It might sound a lot worse than it is. One can limit one’s practice to federal courts, be admitted to the federal bar and not be required to be admitted to a state’s bar.
Better make a list, and start checking it twice before jumping out in traffic, like Dan Rather did. He ended up giving his adversaries more help than flak.
February 15th, 2005 at 12:07 pmI wonder what Bush thinks the constitution says about who is “qualified.”
Shortly after the 9th Circuit Court ruled the added words “under God” unconstitutional in the Pledge of Allegiance, Bush reacted by saying; “I believe that it points up the fact that we need common-sense judges who understand that our rights were derived from God. And those are the kind of judges I intend to put on the bench.”
Article VI, Clause 3, United States Constitution states that; “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
President Bush was required by law, as prescribed in the United States Constitution (Article II, Section I, Clause 8), to swear (or affirm) the following oath on his Inaugural; “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States.”
Seems like he was stating his intent to violate the constitution at his first chance. Isn’t that supposed to be an impeachable offence? Did we hear anyone even mention it in the MSM or the loyal oppostition at the time???
I don’t remember anyone saying anything. How sad is that?
February 15th, 2005 at 1:42 pmThe above should read “Clause 8.” Not sure how that happened.
February 15th, 2005 at 1:45 pmJoseph, that’s a serious Constitutional caveat. Thanks for sharing it. I mean, how major can you get? There it is in the Constitution, and there’s Bush directly refuting the Constitution. You know why he gets away with it? Because Americans don’t know their Constitutions as well as they know their bibles (or, conversely, Maxim magazine). And as Joseph says, that’s just sad.
Comment #8 above is clearly a Republican/conservative apologist; I know their kind, and that one stinks like a corpse under hot lights. We got yer number, friend. You ain’t foolin’ no one.
Oh, and – I think this speaks for itself, you know? The Bushies excel at politics, politics, politics, for the sake of politics, and nothing else matters. Bush would literally sell his mother if it meant more chits on the Republican’s side. The lot of them are as un-American as you can get, a disgrace not only to the country but to humanity’s essence. Perversions of form, lent breathing power, for purposes that only Satan knows.
February 15th, 2005 at 2:43 pmRead Orwell, both 1984 AND Animal Farm. My god, was he on the money or what? Not even Mao Tse Tung put double-speak to such brilliant effect. They certainly know what they’re doing; it’s as though they’ve slipped the entire US a gigantic “date rape” pill… because most of the country is still fast asleep, even tho’ it’s getting royally screwed. Sorry; I don’t mean to be crude here, but the reality is basically just that. We are all getting shafted by a gang of laughing rapists. Why can’t more Americans SEE this? The REST of the world does…
February 16th, 2005 at 1:05 pmstone mountain texas hold
quashes aspiring administers.
December 23rd, 2005 at 6:20 pmG’day, the best webmasters! It is the best work, which I ever ve seen Everything is so harmonious, that even such aggressive critic as I would not be desirable to change anything! I cannot call this subject as a hobby as it became my life with the advent of your site!
January 1st, 2006 at 7:38 amInteresting WWW page. Our family is using it Wonderful and informative site, well written, easy to navigate. I like your site very much! Great work! I will recommend it to my friends and come back. Bonnie Parken e-mail%
January 3rd, 2006 at 9:49 amHey Wonderful Site Guys! Thanks For what I have seen, this site is not bad at all I shall recommend this site to my friends and colleagues.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:40 pmI hope you have the info that I need. Greetings to you for what you’ve done with your site People really love you and appreciate your work!
January 4th, 2006 at 11:51 amYour site is really better than the best Cool. With this site, my quest for Internet knowledge is for a short time over. Life is good again. Really good site. Very structured and fast to open. Regards
January 4th, 2006 at 11:53 amHello, friends, I’d like to leave a memory at your GB. All is so good, that I’d like to find out any mistake or discrepancy, but I have not found. Take my words; it is not insulting for me. I am really very glad for you! Cheerio, I am admired!
January 4th, 2006 at 3:24 pmI have been pleasantly surprised by registration and the maintenance of your site. your site is very pleasant and very cool! Thanks a lot!!! I found really interesting information here. Thank you a lot!
January 8th, 2006 at 9:38 amSuper! The site is created on envy to all unlucky webdesigners! Thanks, I could not find anywhere that I have found at your site. Hi, just surfed in with my best friend and enjoyed your website. Best wishes to all of you…
January 8th, 2006 at 8:47 pmIt is so wonderful, that we all have gathered here today. I spend almost all my time in the Internet, and at my work and at home, when I feel weariness search for something on this theme. Having found your site, I have understood that I should not waste time on search more. Farewell, I have spent time at your site very pleasantly
January 10th, 2006 at 11:58 amnice!
February 13th, 2006 at 2:45 pm