It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kavanaugh Vote Live from the Senate Floor

page: 8
31
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: ausername

I heard they were in Munich drinking beer.



Did you see former President Clinton's costume?

www.tmz.com...





edit on 6-10-2018 by Onlyyouknow because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Kavanaugh is a Clinton crime fixer.

The cringeworthy performances by Ford and Kavanaugh did not distract me from that disqualifying truth, because I knew from the get-go that the Democrats would have to go all out to make their fake opposition appear convincing.

Trump nominated the *James Comey* of the Vince Foster investigation. There's no elaborate distraction that will ever change that fact.

...if Hillary is drinking it is in celebration.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Had they been electric.

Then we would have needed to worry.




posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT




Thankyou for being such a corrupt and absolutely terrible presidential candidate, Hillary.


No kidding.

If roles were reverse we'd be talking about Supreme Court Justice Obama.




posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Right, that's why they tried to destroy him, and he even blamed the whole sham against him on the Clintons because democrats were still angry over Her election loss.

Meh



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: neo96

Kavanaugh is a Clinton crime fixer.

The cringeworthy performances by Ford and Kavanaugh did not distract me from that disqualifying truth, because I knew from the get-go that the Democrats would have to go all out to make their fake opposition appear convincing.

Trump nominated the *James Comey* of the Vince Foster investigation. There's no elaborate distraction that will ever change that fact.

...if Hillary is drinking it is in celebration.


Kav hates the Clintons....not sure where you are getting anything otherwise.

Clinton's hate him too.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: IAMTAT




Thankyou for being such a corrupt and absolutely terrible presidential candidate, Hillary.


No kidding.

If roles were reverse we'd be talking about Supreme Court Justice Obama.



Actually, I think under President Hillary Clinton...this would've been the Loretta Lynch seat.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

We dodged multiple bullets then.


edit on 6-10-2018 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

She's laughing over a glass of champagne, right now.


I have seen that, yes.

Although if Kavanaugh was acting when he lashed out at The Cilntons,
he is a very good actor.

Makes ya wonder....

ETA: Though the fixer for Vince was in the FBI, not Kavanaugh.

Who was that there in the FBI? There you will find your answer....
edit on 6-10-2018 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Not buying it.

CLinton is pro police state ( only the cops should have gunz).

Kavanaugh's opinion is closest to my own.

Total effing deregulation, and gun control is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: IAMTAT




Thankyou for being such a corrupt and absolutely terrible presidential candidate, Hillary.


No kidding.

If roles were reverse we'd be talking about Supreme Court Justice Obama.



Actually, I think under President Hillary Clinton...this would've been the Loretta Lynch seat.


Yep....imagine how that would have affected the US for years....having another Clinton SC member ....

Whew!



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   
www.scotusblog.com... from scotus blog list of cases before the court that they are watching

www.scotusblog.com... and list of cases for october 2018 that are pending before the court

Mount Lemmon Fire District v. Guido, No. 17-587 [Arg: 10.1.2018 Trans./Aud.] Issue(s): Whether, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the same 20-employee minimum that applies to private employers also applies to political subdivisions of a state, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 6th, 7th, 8th and 10th Circuits have held, or whether the ADEA applies instead to all state political subdivisions of any size, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held in this case. Weyerhaeuser Company v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, No. 17-71 [Arg: 10.1.2018 Trans./Aud.] Issue(s): (1) Whether the Endangered Species Act prohibits designation of private land as unoccupied critical habitat that is neither habitat nor essential to species conservation; and (2) whether an agency decision not to exclude an area from critical habitat because of the economic impact of designation is subject to judicial review. Gundy v. U.S., No. 17-6086 [Arg: 10.2.2018 Trans./Aud.] Issue(s): Whether the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act’s delegation of authority to the attorney general to issue regulations under 42 U.S.C. § 16913 violates the nondelegation doctrine. Madison v. Alabama, No. 17-7505 [Arg: 10.2.2018 Trans./Aud.] Issue(s): (1) Whether, consistent with the Eighth Amendment, and the Supreme Court’s decisions in Ford v. Wainwright and Panetti v. Quarterman, a state may execute a prisoner whose mental disability leaves him with no memory of his commission of the capital offense; and (2) whether evolving standards of decency and the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment bar the execution of a prisoner whose competency has been compromised by vascular dementia and multiple strokes causing severe cognitive dysfunction and a degenerative medical condition that prevents him from remembering the crime for which he was convicted or understanding the circumstances of his scheduled execution. Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, No. 17-647 [Arg: 10.3.2018 Trans./Aud.] Issue(s): (1) Whether the Supreme Court should reconsider the portion of Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank that requires property owners to exhaust state court remedies to ripen federal takings claims; and (2) whether Williamson County’s ripeness doctrine bars review of takings claims that assert that a law causes an unconstitutional taking on its face, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 3rd, 6th, 9th and 10th Circuits hold, or whether facial claims are exempt from Williamson County, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 4th and 7th Circuits hold. New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira, No. 17-340 [Arg: 10.3.2018 Trans./Aud.] Issue(s): (1) Whether a dispute over applicability of the Federal Arbitration Act's Section 1 exemption is an arbitrability issue that must be resolved in arbitration pursuant to a valid delegation clause; and (2) whether the FAA's Section 1 exemption, which applies on its face only to “contracts of employment,” is inapplicable to independent contractor agreements. Stokeling v. U.S., No. 17-5554 [Arg: 10.9.2018] Issue(s): Whether a state robbery offense that includes “as an element” the common law requirement of overcoming “victim resistance” is categorically a “violent felony” under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i), when the offense has been specifically interpreted by state appellate courts to require only slight force to overcome resistance. U.S. v. Sims, No. 17-766 [Arg: 10.9.2018] Issue(s): Whether burglary of a nonpermanent or mobile structure that is adapted or used for overnight accommodation can qualify as “burglary” under the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). U.S. v. Stitt, No. 17-765 [Arg: 10.9.2018] Issue(s): Whether burglary of a nonpermanent or mobile structure that is adapted or used for overnight accommodation can qualify as “burglary” under the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). Air and Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, No. 17-1104 [Arg: 10.10.2018] Issue(s): Whether products-liability defendants can be held liable under maritime law for injuries caused by products that they did not make, sell or distribute. Nielsen v. Preap, No. 16-1363 [Arg: 10.10.2018] Issue(s): Whether a criminal alien becomes exempt from mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) if, after the alien is released from criminal custody, the Department of Homeland Security does not take him into immigration custody immediately. November Sitting Lamps Plus Inc. v. Varela, No. 17-988 [Arg: 10.29.2018] Issue(s): Whether the Federal Arbitration Act forecloses a state-law interpretation of an arbitration agreement that would authorize class arbitration based solely on general language commonly used in arbitration agreements. Henry Schein Inc. v. Archer and White Sales Inc., No. 17-1272 [Arg: 10.29.2018] Issue(s): Whether the Federal Arbitration Act permits a court to decline to enforce an agreement delegating questions of arbitrability to an arbitrator if the court concludes the claim of arbitrability is “wholly groundless.” Washington State Department of Licensing v. Cougar Den Inc., No. 16-1498 [Arg: 10.30.2018] Issue(s): Whether the Yakama Treaty of 1855 creates a right for tribal members to avoid state taxes on off-reservation commercial activities that make use of public highways. CVSG: 05/15/2018. Garza v. Idaho, No. 17-1026 [Arg: 10.30.2018] Issue(s): Whether the “presumption of prejudice” recognized in Roe v. Flores-Ortega applies when a criminal defendant instructs his trial counsel to file a notice of appeal but trial counsel decides not to do so because the defendant’s plea agreement included an appeal waiver. Frank v. Gaos, No. 17-961 [Arg: 10.31.2018] Issue(s): Whether, or in what circumstances, a cy pres award of class action proceeds that provides no direct relief to class members supports class certification and comports with the requirement that a settlement binding class members must be “fair, reasonable, and adequate.” Jam v. Int'l Finance Corp., No. 17-1011 [Arg: 10.31.2018] Issue(s): Whether the International Organizations Immunities Act—which affords international organizations the “same immunity” from suit that foreign governments have, 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b)—confers the same immunity on such organizations as foreign governments have under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602-11. Virginia Uranium v. Warren, No. 16-1275 [Arg: 11.5.2018] Issue(s): Whether the Atomic Energy Act pre-empts a state law that on its face regulates an activity within its jurisdiction (here, uranium mining), but has the purpose and effect of regulating the radiological safety hazards of activities entrusted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (here, the milling of uranium and the management of the resulting tailings). CVSG: 04/09/2018. Sturgeon v. Frost, No. 17-949 [Arg: 11.5.2018] Issue(s): Whether the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act prohibits the National Park Service from exercising regulatory control over state, native corporation and private land physically located within the boundaries of the national park system in Alaska. BNSF Railway Company v. Loos, No. 17-1042 [Arg: 11.6.2018] Issue(s): Whether a railroad’s payment to an employee for time lost from work is subject to employment taxes under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act. Bucklew v. Precythe, No. 17-8151 [Arg: 11.6.2018] Issue(s): (1) Whether a court evaluating an as-applied challenge to a state’s method of execution based on an inmate’s rare and severe medical condition should assume that medical personnel are competent to manage his condition and that procedure will go as intended; (2) whether evidence comparing a state’s method of execution with an alternative proposed by an inmate must be offered via a single witness, or whether a court at summary judgment must look to the record as a whole to determine whether a factfinder could conclude that the two methods significantly differ in the risks they pose to the inmate; (3) whether the Eighth Amendment requires an inmate to prove an adequate alternative method of execution when raising an as-applied challenge to the state’s proposed method of execution based on his rare and severe medical condition; and (4) whether petitioner Russell Bucklew met his burden under Glossip v. Gross to prove what procedures would be used to administer his proposed alternative method of execution, the severity and duration of pain likely to be produced, and how they compare to the state’s method of execution. Culbertson v. Berryhill, No. 17-773 [Arg: 11.7.2018] Issue(s): Whether fees subject to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)’s 25-percent cap related to the representation of individuals claiming Social Security benefits include, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 6th, 9th, and 10th Circuits hold, only fees for representation in court or, as the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 4th, 5th, and 11th Circuits hold, also fees for representation before the agency. Republic of Sudan v. Harrison, No. 16-1094 [Arg: 11.7.2018] Issue(s): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit erred by holding – in direct conflict with the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia, 5th and 7th Circuits and in the face of an amicus brief from the United States – that plaintiffs suing a foreign state under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act may serve the foreign state under 28 U.S.C. § 1608(a)(3) by mail addressed and dispatched to the head of the foreign state's ministry of foreign affairs “via” or in “care of” the foreign state's diplomatic mission in the United States, despite U.S. obligations under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to preserve mission inviolability. CVSG: 05/22/2018.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MotherMayEye

She's hitting the hard stuff righta bout now.


Trump and Kavanaugh WIN!

Thankyou for being such a corrupt and absolutely terrible presidential candidate, Hillary.

Why do Dems love Hillary, again? SHE lost them EVERYTHING!
Seriously...WHY would ANY leftist still like Hillary Clinton?


It's a cult. Dissent is not allowed. Wait til you see what they do to Joe Manchin.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

yeah no matter what happens to trump and republicans now the lower,federal and scotus have shifted to the right for generations to come



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: RalagaNarHallas

Only if we keep control of the senate.

We lose both they will impeach Kavanaugh.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

That's like saying that Comey and Hillary hate each other. It's just not true even if it were to suddenly appear to be true.

Kavanaugh was the lead investigator into Vince Foster's death and he omitted evidence that Foster was murdered to officially conclude it was a suicide. And that isn't all he did to pad the suicide conclusion.

It's all well documented.

He should have never even been considered for this seat.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Not buying it.

CLinton is pro police state ( only the cops should have gunz).

Kavanaugh's opinion is closest to my own.

Total effing deregulation, and gun control is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Yep, that's how Despots protect themselves. Disarm America ? Good luck with that....



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Trump keeps winning and winning and winning.
This week alone...renegotiates NAFTA, unemployment lowest since the summer of '69 and a new Conservative Supreme Court Judge confirmed.
I don't think the US has had a President able to do so much in their first 20 months.
It's incredibly good.



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

i thought even if they swept the senate which wont happen that they would still be a vote or two shy of the 2/3rds required to actually remove him think its 66 or 67 republicans have 9? seats up for re election dems 26? even if they took all 9 from republicans that would put them at 58? still 9ish short for the needed 2/3rds correct?



posted on Oct, 6 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Its not really possible to lose the Senate to the extent that an Impeachment trial would yield the removal of Kavanaugh.
It needs 67 votes., so I think it would be pretty pointless - it would just lead to another loss.




top topics



 
31
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join