complete her answer. speak out as a result the commission determined in the guidelines that it was a substantial aggravating factor if the facts of the case demonstrated that somebody had been distributing hundreds of images. what that meant was over the long maybe it was a long period of time, they had collected one photo at a time. they had potentially mailed one at a time and that showed terrible conduct. i m not saying as a baseline it s terrible but what we are doing is different dumb like differentiating among defendants. it really matters. whether a person distributed one, five, or a thousand. the guidelines i you know what?
place everybody at the same level. the point of judging and the guidelines is to look at what has happened in a case, compared defendants to each other in terms of what they have done, and give proportional penalties mr. chairman, she has said, mr. chairman, she does not use sentencing enhancement in the area of someone using a computer can i explain why, sir? i m going to give the witness is an opportunity to respond to you, senator. finally. the guidelines true created for child pornography, this crime was primarily being committed by people who were literally mailing one, two, five, ten, 100 photos at a time. please, senator, let her
because of the limited nature of the judicial role and the fact that the policies have been adopted by the branch of government that has that authority under the constitution. so i guess i m surprised after nine years on the bench that you re super smart. nobody disputes that. having worked for justice breyer and knowing the philosophical arguments that he and justice kagan had, it seems surprising that you wouldn t be able to speculate not speculate but reflect on the nature of those disagreements to say it depends on the particular case is fine. they have different philosophical approaches. maybe another way, justice breyer for whom you clerked and justice scalia used to travel together and had lively debates, conversations, can you tell the american people about what
0 first of two long and intense days of questioning from members of the senate judiciary committee began this morning with democrats using their questions to allow jackson to issue a rebuttal to republican accusations that she has been soft on crime and republicans pressing her on her record as a judge and public defender and bringing up a whole host of conservative hobby horses. things like critical race theory. jackson has tried to stay above the fray in her responses. early on in the hearing, she told democratic senator, dick durbin, quote, i tried to stay in my lane. along with me are claire mccaskill and msnbc political analyst with danielle holly walker, dean and professor at howard school of law and joyce vance, law professor at university of alabama as well as an msnbc legal analyst. we have a few minutes before we go back to the hearing. claire, i want to start with you. just some of the fireworks that happened earlier today. just in the last hour or so. senator ted cruz arriv
getting listen to this, 85% of the vote. 85%. that doesn t happen very often. a major party candidate getting 10, 12, 14% of the vote in mcauliffe s case, it tells you the republican base was completely activated and democrats, especially in many black areas, and also i have to say the youth vote, here in my backyard, they didn t turn out. so when you have that combination, this kind of result is inevitable. it strikes me that parties often tend to overlearn the positive lessons from elections like that, maybe underlearn the negative. i wonder if we turn to the republican party here, the thing about youngkin was that he did not run as a trump. he put some deliberately very deliberately put some distance between him and trump. is there a lesson for republicans as well that their path to victory, not just in