Judge Newman has threatened to have staff arrested, forcibly removed from the building, and fired. She accused staff of trickery, deceit, acting as her adversary, stealing her computer, stealing her files, and depriving her of secretarial support. Staff have described Judge Newman in their interactions with her as “aggressive, angry, combative, and intimidating”; “bizarre and unnecessarily hostile”; making “personal accusations”; “agitated, belligerent, and demonstratively angry”; and “ranting, rambling, and paranoid.” Indeed, interactions with Judge Newman have become so dysfunctional that the Clerk of the Court has advised staff to avoid interacting with her in person or, when they must, to bring a co-worker with them.
The rest of his comment is in support of no age limit for judges. He states in no uncertain terms that the older the judge, the better. His thinking is the cause for a slew of arguably poor decisions made from out of touch geriatric people who overwhelmingly rule over this country.
I’m in support of age limits for people who can directly and insurmountably affect my life. He is not. Therein lies the rub.
I’m not sure if you’re being purposely obtuse, nowhere did he say “the older the judge, they better”.
Using context clues, I think it’s fair to say I’m not the one being obtuse with my interpretation of OPs comment. Also, there’s a typo in your quote of me.
See, you’re doing it again. Just because he is ok with some older judges, you’ve drawn the conclusion that he supports this judge - despite the fact that he clearly stated he didn’t. That’s not “contextual clues”, but just reading what you want to read.
It was autocorrect
I’m done arguing with you.