Biden’s Supreme Court nominee today defended her record of going easy on child porn offenders and her explanation doesn’t make much sense:
Jackson explained that the sentencing guidelines are outdated because when they were issued, someone was judged the child porn photos they received in the snail mail as opposed to how predators get photos nowadays, which is via their computers.
But why does that make any difference? If someone has a collection of child porn photos that they got in the mail versus having them as images stored on their computer, they still have the photos. There is no significant difference in terms of possession. Child pornography is highly illegal and it should make no difference how someone received the photos. Possessing a photo is participation in the victimization of that child, regardless of the mode of access.
In related news, Jackson said she didn’t remember referring to the US government as war criminals for holding terrorists at Gitmo:
While she didn’t remember it, she did defend it saying she was trying to preserve the complaints of her clients. But Lindsey quickly pointed out that there was no reason to make such a claim and that doing so went to far.
Jackson also claimed she didn’t know that Joe Biden had filibustered Judge Janice Rogers Brown:
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson says she was unaware that Democrats and then-Sen. Joe Biden filibustered Judge Janice Rogers Brown's nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for two years. pic.twitter.com/znXbOVZKbO
— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) March 22, 2022
Of course she refused to weigh in on that upon learning of it.