Just a note, he is not a SCOTUS jurist.  Whose job is to run the DOJ, a different kettle of fish.

But he was up for SCOTUS and was presented as an eminently qualified jurist.  He doesn’t appear to be all that good at what he’s doing.

There is a difference in mind set and skills needed for analysis of constitutional law and office organization.  I'm not sure he's the right fit, but I do think there is a bit of a rush to judgement here.  He didn't get the job until 3-11.  

Again, he should have been able to answer the questions asked of him and he either could not or would not. The fact that he has no answers for simple, specific direct questions is suspicious. 

I wasn't commenting on his congressional hearing.  I was discussing his current actual performance.

He’s had the job since March? Plenty of time to know what is going on.

And as I said, I'm not sure he is the right choice.  

Just a note! Many big corporations allow more than 90 days for review of performance.  I have only read up on his handling of the school board issue which IMPO has been way overblown.  I have no idea of any other ways he's performed his job.

I missed what you said, thanks.

He has now been called out on more than one big blunder. He never knows anything about it or denies it.  That is sleazy behavior.