Trump Negotiates with Harris and Feinstein on Judge Picks

 

Since when do Senators get to choose Donald Trump’s nominees for the positions of federal judges? Since now.

In an article on Powerline which references an editorial piece in the Wall Street Journal , Trump has withdrawn three names from his original list of 50 judicial nominees. Imagine the outrage of Kamala Harris and Dianne Feinstein: all of the judges are considered to be conservative. The irony is that these potential judges and their records would otherwise be admired by people from the Left and Right. Patrick Bumatay is an assistant U.S. Attorney who specializes in drug enforcement; he is also a 40-year old gay Filipino American. Daniel Collins has a private law practice, was an associate deputy attorney general and worked on issues like child exploitation. And Kenneth Lee, also in private practice, was an associate counsel to George W. Bush and has a pro bono practice for the poor and incarcerated.

These are the men that Harris and Feinstein have rejected.

But both Senators offered an alternative for selecting nominees for the three open positions:

The Democrats want to pick one name from the White House list, one from their own and a third consensus nominee.

Both articles suggest reasons that President Trump might have agreed to this request. None of the reasons make any sense to me. They appear to be based on a hope and a prayer that the Democrats will be more cooperative toward future judges.

Consulting Senators in the past was done as a courtesy—you know, when Senators were willing to be more cooperative.

This decision bodes a bad future for our judiciary. Do you see something I might be missing that makes this a good strategy?

 

Published in Politics
Tags:

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 99 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Drusus Inactive
    Drusus
    @Drusus

    What I really love about all the comments, just like always, is that no matter what Trump does that you don’t like, it is somehow the fault of Mitch McConnell and nefarious NeverTrumpers. It would be funny if it weren’t so boring. 

    • #61
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Drusus (View Comment):

    What I really love about all the comments, just like always, is that no matter what Trump does that you don’t like, it is somehow the fault of Mitch McConnell and nefarious NeverTrumpers. It would be funny if it weren’t so boring.

    Not all of us think that, @drusus. I was going to give him the full blame, it it had been true.

    • #62
  3. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Drusus (View Comment):

    What I really love about all the comments, just like always, is that no matter what Trump does that you don’t like, it is somehow the fault of Mitch McConnell and nefarious NeverTrumpers. It would be funny if it weren’t so boring.

    Sometimes boring is good. 

    • #63
  4. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    It is nice to have one issue of Judges where NeverTrumpers/Severe Trump Skeptics and EverTrumpers stand shoulder to shoulder.

    Trump has done a good job with Judges.

    • #64
  5. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Susan Quinn: Since when do Senators get to choose Donald Trump’s nominees for the positions of federal judges? Since now.

    [snip]

    Consulting Senators in the past was done as a courtesy—you know, when Senators were willing to be more cooperative.

    This decision bodes a bad future for our judiciary. Do you see something I might be missing that makes this a good strategy?

    Let’s go to the text:

    From Article II, Section 2:

    [The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

    The President appoints SC judges with the advice and consent of the Senate.  It’s a check on his power which is (rightly) not absolute.

    It used to be worse.  The reason that SC nominations used to be lopsided is because of the filibuster.  Between 1969 and 2013, when the judicial filibustered for SC nominees was ended, there were 14 successful confirmation votes.  Only one of them was close: Clarence Thomas.  (There were only three rejections in that period.) 

    The reason is because any nominee who couldn’t get enough voted to beat a filibuster was pulled.  Someone like Kavanaugh would have been pulled had it not been for Harry Reid.

    The President is not king.  He’s supposed to negotiate with the Senate over nominations.  Senators, even Democratic ones, have a role to play in the process.  When you do end-runs around Congress or try to jam things through, it usually leads to bad stuff.

     

    • #65
  6. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Stad (View Comment):

    All I have to say is, “Thanks for nothing, you Trump-hating never-Trumpers. If you’ve ticked him off enough to make him take these looney-left clowns seriously, then may all your court cases be tried before a Feinstein-Harris judge.

    Naaawwwww . . . Trump doesn’t like losing, so this must be part of a plan. We’ll see with the next few nominees . . .

    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list.  The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society.  That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

     

    • #66
  7. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    And how do you know that’s the reason it happened, Fred? Gee, maybe someone suggested it because he knew little about the judges available and he agreed that it was a good idea. And clearly, it was.

    • #67
  8. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

     

    Blue slips exist for a reason.

    The idea is that the home state Senator of a nominee might know something or have details about a nominee that people in Washington might not necessarily know.

    For those of you who value local knowledge, you can see the practicality of such a thing.  A Senator from Utah might not know if the guy from Maine is a drunk who beats his wife and steal from the treasury of the Elks club, but the Senator from Maine might.

    And I like the idea that individual Senators can hold things up.  It’s one of those protective barriers, like the filibuster, that limits how much damage can be done by tyrants, inside or outside the Senate.

    • #68
  9. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Moderator Note:

    Unacceptable language.

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    And how do you know that’s the reason it happened, Fred? Gee, maybe someone suggested it because he knew little about the judges available and he agreed that it was a good idea. And clearly, it was.

    I know because I was paying attention at the time. 

    The Right puts enormous emphasis on judicial nominations.  Many people here on Ricochet will twist themselves into knots defending a [redacted] just because he picks the right judges.

    Trump released his lists of potential judicial nominees as a way of getting conservatives on board with his nomination.  

    • #69
  10. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    And how do you know that’s the reason it happened, Fred? Gee, maybe someone suggested it because he knew little about the judges available and he agreed that it was a good idea. And clearly, it was.

    I know because I was paying attention at the time.

    The Right puts enormous emphasis on judicial nominations. Many people here on Ricochet will twist themselves into knots defending a [redacted] just because he picks the right judges.

    Trump released his lists of potential judicial nominees as a way of getting conservatives on board with his nomination.

    It’s still your interpretation, Fred, not a fact. You can criticize Trump on this post, but if you’re going to use that kind of language, please leave.

    • #70
  11. George Townsend Inactive
    George Townsend
    @GeorgeTownsend

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    And how do you know that’s the reason it happened, Fred? Gee, maybe someone suggested it because he knew little about the judges available and he agreed that it was a good idea. And clearly, it was.

    I think it’s clear that Fred is on to something. Trump did talk about appointing his sister. He knows a lot less about most things than some people are willing to admit. He does deserve credit for agreeing to the acquiescence. But it clearly wasn’t his idea.

    • #71
  12. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    George Townsend (View Comment):
    I think it’s clear that Fred is on to something. Trump did talk about appointing his sister. He knows a lot less about most things than some people are willing to admit. He does deserve credit for agreeing to the acquiescence. But it clearly wasn’t his idea.

    I think most people think he was kidding and just wanted to push buttons. Clearly, it worked!

    • #72
  13. Thejokewasonme Member
    Thejokewasonme
    @

    She (View Comment):

    Thejokewasonme (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    …the short legislative work week continue unassailed…

    I count this among the blessings. Even 10% greater “productivity” could end the republic. No ones property is safe so long as Congress is sitting.

    Fumbled this, I did. Appears to be no way to un-flag an erroneous flagging. With apology.

    It’s OK. This happens occasionally. The “flag” and “like” buttons are (IMHO) a bit close together, especially on a smaller screen. I saw the flag. Thought “Huh. Wonder if tjwom meant “Like.”” Checked the comment. Saw you did “like” the comment. No harm, no foul. We generally do not shoot first and ask questions later, as many members who think it takes us far too long to respond to issues will tell you. Of course, just as many members will tell you that we act without thinking and move much too quickly on things. Never a dull moment. You are correct, though, a flag can’t be unflagged. If you’re in doubt about something in the future, a quick email to mods@ricochet.com, will alert us and we’ll help sort it out.

    Thank you for the follow-up.  I get a bit flustered, at times.  This happened this AM and I acted too quickly, thinking I was correcting when actually I was making it worse.  Appreciate not being called an “idiot,” or ‘Moron,” or some other such name.

    • #73
  14. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    And how do you know that’s the reason it happened, Fred? Gee, maybe someone suggested it because he knew little about the judges available and he agreed that it was a good idea. And clearly, it was.

    I think it’s clear that Fred is on to something. Trump did talk about appointing his sister. He knows a lot less about most things than some people are willing to admit. He does deserve credit for agreeing to the acquiescence. But it clearly wasn’t his idea.

    The one time I was deeply tempted to vote for Trump in 2016 was when he released his list of proposed Justices for the Supreme Court.  Then Trump said that I had no choice but to vote for him, and my response was “The hell I don’t have any other choice!”

    The left has no idea how important the Courts are to us.

    I am glad that all of us are together on this.

    • #74
  15. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Thejokewasonme (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):

    Thejokewasonme (View Comment):

    Sisyphus (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    …the short legislative work week continue unassailed…

    I count this among the blessings. Even 10% greater “productivity” could end the republic. No ones property is safe so long as Congress is sitting.

    Fumbled this, I did. Appears to be no way to un-flag an erroneous flagging. With apology.

    It’s OK. This happens occasionally. The “flag” and “like” buttons are (IMHO) a bit close together, especially on a smaller screen. I saw the flag. Thought “Huh. Wonder if tjwom meant “Like.”” Checked the comment. Saw you did “like” the comment. No harm, no foul. We generally do not shoot first and ask questions later, as many members who think it takes us far too long to respond to issues will tell you. Of course, just as many members will tell you that we act without thinking and move much too quickly on things. Never a dull moment. You are correct, though, a flag can’t be unflagged. If you’re in doubt about something in the future, a quick email to mods@ricochet.com, will alert us and we’ll help sort it out.

    Thank you for the follow-up. I get a bit flustered, at times. This happened this AM and I acted too quickly, thinking I was correcting when actually I was making it worse. Appreciate not being called an “idiot,” or ‘Moron,” or some other such name.

    I’ll bet every one of us has done that at one time or another by accident. Don’t worry! You’re not alone!

    • #75
  16. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    Consulting Senators in the past was done as a courtesy—you know, when Senators were willing to be more cooperative.

    As I understand it, when Senator Grassley was in charge of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, he eventually stopped the Blue Slip. I am not a hundred percent certain, but I have followed this on the Hugh Hewitt Show, and that was my understanding. Now that Lindsay Graham is in charge, I do not know the future of the Blue Slip.

    No elected official in the House or the Senate should have a one-man veto on anything.

    • #76
  17. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    @susanquinn, Powerline has updated the story and apparently M&F are not getting what they want.

     

    Thanks, Rodin. It’s unclear what ended up happening and why, but it looks like Trump stayed with two of his nominees and added a third with a good conservative reputation. Here’s a quote from Powerline:

    What happened here? I’m not sure. My guess is that Feinstein and Harris realized all along that the White House wouldn’t go for a mixed slate of Ninth Circuit judges, with some selected by the two libs. Their more realistic goal, I believe, was to derail Bumatay.

    Why? Because down the road, Bumatay might have been a candidate for the Supreme Court. And the last thing the left wants is a conservative, originalist Supreme Court nominee who is both gay and Asian.

    It appears that Bumatay could still be on that path down the road, since he’s nominated for another circuit court. I wish Trump had said no, period, but it’s lots better than it could have been. Be prepared for more shenanigans from the Left.

    To be clear, Bumatay is now nominated for a federal district court seat, the trial judge level, under the same circuit, the 9th, to which he had been nominated at the appellate level (the crew we always hear bad things about before the U.S. Supreme Court reverses their decision). His influence will be limited to the cases he hears in his district, and he is farther away from consideration for SCOTUS, which is what the Democrats fear. 

    Here is the new presidential announcement of judicial nominees.

     

    • #77
  18. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    Consulting Senators in the past was done as a courtesy—you know, when Senators were willing to be more cooperative.

    As I understand it, when Senator Grassley was in charge of the Judiciary Committee in the Senate, he eventually stopped the Blue Slip. I am not a hundred percent certain, but I have followed this on the Hugh Hewitt Show, and that was my understanding. Now that Lindsay Graham is in charge, I do not know the future of the Blue Slip.

    From the horse’s mouth:

    Let me be clear: I will maintain the blue slip courtesy.

    But some of my Democratic colleagues and left-wing outside groups mistakenly assert that the blue slip affords a home-state senator veto power over a nominee. That is not true. Only two out of eighteen of the previous Chairmen in the last 100 years allowed a single senator to wield veto power over a nominee.

    • #78
  19. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    I read about this yesterday someplace else, and they noted that two of the three have already been re-nominated. Bumatay has not, but the writer speculated that he’s holding him for a lower court, to be hopefully groomed for further advancement later. That article (I wish I could remember where I saw it, Instapundit?) was much more rosy than Susan Quinn portrays.

    It was an update article on Powerline, which originally made it sound pretty bad.

    So, while the President has held the line on his promise, we still have the Republican Senate effectively colluding with Democrats by only conducting floor business (“debate” clock) 3 days a week, while letting the Democrats demand 30 hours of debate per nominee, for both judges and administration officers.  

    • #79
  20. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    And how do you know that’s the reason it happened, Fred? Gee, maybe someone suggested it because he knew little about the judges available and he agreed that it was a good idea. And clearly, it was.

    I think it’s clear that Fred is on to something. Trump did talk about appointing his sister. He knows a lot less about most things than some people are willing to admit. He does deserve credit for agreeing to the acquiescence. But it clearly wasn’t his idea.

    Who’s his sister?  Bobby Kennedy?

    • #80
  21. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    I think it happened because Trump knew his shortcomings in who should be appointed.

    I applaud his outsourcing.  Heck, you could say appointing cabinet members is “outsourcing” his responsibilities.

    As for Trump’s sister, would you prefer she or RBG to be on the bench?

    • #81
  22. George Townsend Inactive
    George Townsend
    @GeorgeTownsend

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Who’s his sister? Bobby Kenned

    She’s 81, and has a mixed record…..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryanne_Trump_Barry

    • #82
  23. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Back on track with the OP, here is Chairman Lindsey Graham’s recent commitment to promptly consider President Trump’s nominees:

    JANUARY 23, 2019
    Chairman Graham Welcomes President’s Intent to Nominate Highly Qualified Judicial Nominees

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement on President Donald Trump’s intent to nominate 51 judicial nominees.

    “I truly appreciate the prompt attention President Trump and his White House team have shown to judicial nominations. I also appreciate the list of 51 impressive judicial nominations to fulfill the Senate’s constitutional role in advice and consent,” Graham said. “The committee will immediately begin working on these important nominations and trying to confirm as many as possible, as soon as possible.”

    • #83
  24. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Here is Chairman Graham’s response to President Trump’s latest notice of nominees for the 9th Circuit:

    JANUARY 31, 2019
    Graham on Ninth Circuit Nominees

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement on President Donald Trump’s intent to nominate individuals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

    “I’m very supportive of the nominees submitted by President Trump to serve on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. These are highly qualified nominees and I am hopeful they will receive wide bipartisan support,” Graham said. “These nominations continue a trend by the Trump Administration of selecting highly qualified men and women to serve on the federal bench.”

    Background:

    Daniel A. Bress of California, to serve as a Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
    Daniel P. Collins of California, to serve as a Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
    Kenneth Kiyul Lee of California, to serve as a Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

    • #84
  25. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Here is Chairman Graham’s response to President Trump’s latest notice of nominees for the 9th Circuit:

    JANUARY 31, 2019
    Graham on Ninth Circuit Nominees

    WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement on President Donald Trump’s intent to nominate individuals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

    “I’m very supportive of the nominees submitted by President Trump to serve on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. These are highly qualified nominees and I am hopeful they will receive wide bipartisan support,” Graham said. “These nominations continue a trend by the Trump Administration of selecting highly qualified men and women to serve on the federal bench.”

    Background:

    Daniel A. Bress of California, to serve as a Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
    Daniel P. Collins of California, to serve as a Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
    Kenneth Kiyul Lee of California, to serve as a Circuit Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

    Thanks so much for keeping us updated, @cliffordbrown!

    • #85
  26. T-Fiks Member
    T-Fiks
    @TFiks

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    The WSJ article guessed that he might be looking ahead at Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat, hoping they won’t give a nominee as hard a time as Kavanaugh. Right.

    I want proof of life from RBG. She hasn’t been seen in weeks.

     

    Image may contain: 1 person

    • #86
  27. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Who’s his sister? Bobby Kenned

    She’s 81, and has a mixed record…..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryanne_Trump_Barry

    Whereas RBG’s record is pretty solid . . .

    • #87
  28. Max Ledoux Coolidge
    Max Ledoux
    @Max

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    This is a monumentally stupid thing to believe. His sister is turning 82 this April. There was never any chance that Trump was going to appoint an octogenarian to the court, and if you think he was then that says more about your intelligence than his. He was asked at one point if his sister, who was a federal judge, would be a good Supreme Court justice, and he said yes. What’s he supposed to say? “No, I hate my sister”? Of course he said nice things about his own sister. 

    • #88
  29. George Townsend Inactive
    George Townsend
    @GeorgeTownsend

    Max Ledoux (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    This is a monumentally stupid thing to believe. His sister is turning 82 this April. There was never any chance that Trump was going to appoint an octogenarian to the court, and if you think he was then that says more about your intelligence than his. He was asked at one point if his sister, who was a federal judge, would be a good Supreme Court justice, and he said yes. What’s he supposed to say? “No, I hate my sister”? Of course he said nice things about his own sister.

    Why does Max Get to insult not only another member but a contributor? If I insulted another member, by calling him stupid, the moderators would be on me in a NY minute.

    • #89
  30. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    George Townsend (View Comment):

    Max Ledoux (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Trump skeptics are the reason we have his judicial appointees list. The only reason his judicial nominees have been good is because he outsourced the job to the Federalist Society. That happened because nobody trusted Donald Trump not to appoint his sister to the Supreme Court.

    This is a monumentally stupid thing to believe. His sister is turning 82 this April. There was never any chance that Trump was going to appoint an octogenarian to the court, and if you think he was then that says more about your intelligence than his. He was asked at one point if his sister, who was a federal judge, would be a good Supreme Court justice, and he said yes. What’s he supposed to say? “No, I hate my sister”? Of course he said nice things about his own sister.

    Why does Max Get to insult not only another member but a contributor? If I insulted another member, by calling him stupid, the moderators would be on me in a NY minute.

    I thought about that only for a moment, @georgetownsend, but Max didn’t call him stupid, but the belief stupid. Still, you can flag him if you wish. The mods might agree.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.