• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who is Matthew Whitaker, the new acting attorney general?

lurchadams said:
https://www.gq.com/story/matthew-whitaker-is-the-toilet-attorney-general

In a pitch-perfect Trumpian twist, it turns out that before ascending to his current role, Matthew Whitaker was also a cartoonish, grifting dope who shilled for a company that hawked time-travel cryptocurrencies, Bigfoot dolls, and toilets specially designed for men with big dicks
Click to expand...

I don't understand why this isn't a bigger story. Democracy literally died this week. The king can literally install someone in his kingdom to help make him, the primary servant of the people, impervious to accountability to the people, whom he is supposed to serve. Are we so numb to the absurd?
Click to expand...

That last item probably appealed to him mostly because he probably has a tiny penis. This way, people would think he must be well endowed, something most tyrants, especially the super-religious ones, dream of.
 
“The water is cold”—-“yeah, and deep too!”

:mrgreen:
 
Xelor said:
I don't generally care to reference MSNBC content, but the video found here -- Whitaker disqualifications run deeper than sketchy work history -- is well worth watching.

Among other things, the man was a director for a scam firm that (unsuccessfully) marketed time travel and toilets for well-hung men (See also: Inventvillage.com announces the marketing launch of the MASCULINE TOILET).


The man is laughable in his own right. That he is the acting AG is a national embarrassment.
Click to expand...

So now, toilets will still be referred to as "crappers" (after Sir Thomas Crapper) but the "special" ones will be "whitakers"?
Asking for a well-hung friend...
 
Actually, replace the "w" in whitaker with an "s"....there ya go :lamo
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

If he had, the Trump haters would know about it.
Click to expand...

And how do you know? Do you know what actions he took behind closed doors?
 
Whitaker is Unfit to be Attorney General, Acting or Otherwise
-- Bruce Fein, The American Conservative

  • Matthew Whitaker is unfit to serve as acting U.S. attorney general.

    His ultra-thin credentials for serving as Acting Attorney General hearkens back to a stanza in Sir Joseph Porter’s song in H.M.S. Pinafore:

    “Now landsmen all, whoever you may be,
    If you want to rise to the top of the tree,
    If your soul isn’t fettered to an office stool,
    Be careful to be guided by this golden rule —
    Stick close to your desks and never go to sea,
    And you all may be rulers of the Queen’s Navee.”

    ​
    The infinitude of legal ignorance Mr. Whitaker brings to his position is disqualifying. He deplores the power of judicial review as proclaimed by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison (1803), i.e., the authority of the United States Supreme Court in adjudicating concrete cases or controversies to invalidate actions of Congress, the Executive Branch, or the States for violating the Constitution.
  • Whittaker on Marbury v. Madison:

    "There are so many bad [Supreme Court] rulings. I would start with the idea of Marbury v. Madison. That’s a good place to start…."

    Antonin Scalia on Marbury v. Madison:

    “…Marbury is of course one of the great pillars of American law. It is the beginning of the Supreme Court as the interpreter of the Constitution…As I say, Marbury v. Madison is one of the pillars of the Constitution. To the extent that you think a nominee would be so foolish, or so extreme as to kick over one of the pillars of the Constitution, I suppose you should not confirm him."

Matt is a mediocrity, at best, and of whom, had he remained in his place, there'd be no reason to even mention his name.
 
He's just SO mediocre!


" ...The real story here though isn’t that a right-wing operative wanted to crash a gay-friendly state court, but that his application is so laughably bad. It’s just a complete mess. The good people over at American Bridge have uncovered Whitaker’s application to be considered for the Iowa Supreme Court and… wow. If you wondered why career DOJ personnel are so concerned about Whitaker wielding any significant measure of power in his new quasi-job, this application will set you straight. ..."

https://abovethelaw.com/2018/11/mat...diculous-collection-of-nonsense-and-football/
 
Xelor said:
Whitaker is Unfit to be Attorney General, Acting or Otherwise
-- Bruce Fein, The American Conservative

  • Matthew Whitaker is unfit to serve as acting U.S. attorney general.

    His ultra-thin credentials for serving as Acting Attorney General hearkens back to a stanza in Sir Joseph Porter’s song in H.M.S. Pinafore:

    “Now landsmen all, whoever you may be,
    If you want to rise to the top of the tree,
    If your soul isn’t fettered to an office stool,
    Be careful to be guided by this golden rule —
    Stick close to your desks and never go to sea,
    And you all may be rulers of the Queen’s Navee.”

    ​
    The infinitude of legal ignorance Mr. Whitaker brings to his position is disqualifying. He deplores the power of judicial review as proclaimed by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison (1803), i.e., the authority of the United States Supreme Court in adjudicating concrete cases or controversies to invalidate actions of Congress, the Executive Branch, or the States for violating the Constitution.
  • Whittaker on Marbury v. Madison:

    "There are so many bad [Supreme Court] rulings. I would start with the idea of Marbury v. Madison. That’s a good place to start…."

    Antonin Scalia on Marbury v. Madison:

    “…Marbury is of course one of the great pillars of American law. It is the beginning of the Supreme Court as the interpreter of the Constitution…As I say, Marbury v. Madison is one of the pillars of the Constitution. To the extent that you think a nominee would be so foolish, or so extreme as to kick over one of the pillars of the Constitution, I suppose you should not confirm him."

Matt is a mediocrity, at best, and of whom, had he remained in his place, there'd be no reason to even mention his name.
Click to expand...

And it's turning out that, financially, she's shady AF.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1065054200370028544
https://twitter.com/ChrisMegerian/status/1064994003148402693
 
Tanngrisnir said:
And it's turning out that, financially, she's shady AF.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1065054200370028544
https://twitter.com/ChrisMegerian/status/1064994003148402693
Click to expand...

I will point out that it was 1.2 million over the last 4 years, and, btw, he is the only employee of that charity. (your first link, plus there was an article on the washington post).

Also, people in what WAS his position (as of July 2017) have been required to release their finances so they can show they have no conflict of interests. For some reason, Whitiger is getting away with not releasing the details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom