Supreme Court Pick. . . . Tea leaves say Brett Kavanaugh

a reply to: TheRedneck

If his decisions come from honest thought, and decision making, so be it.

Supreme Court justices have a long history of going their own way, once on the high court... Frankly, that's as it should be. I don't want a justice who toes a party line, beholden to which ever party was in power at the time. I want a Justice who will say it's wrong when its wrong, in their minds, or conversely, call it right, when it's right, in their minds.

Not sure what else we can reasonably expect?

originally posted by: pavil

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: TheRedneck


According to these folks, Kavanaugh is EVIL!
Press the play button at: www.pscp.tv...

Just think of all the energy they wasted making signs and websites for all three contenders? It's amazing how they could have everything ready so fast isn't it?

It looks like many of them are still drawing unemployment or other government benefits. Not for much longer though!

originally posted by: xuenchen
😃😃

somebody is re-tweeting and old tweet from Harry Reid .........

Senator Harry Reid
‏Verified account @SenatorReid

Thanks to all of you who encouraged me to consider filibuster reform. It had to be done.

2:08 PM - 21 Nov 2013 💥😃💥

Think hrc would have picked this guy?
I don't.
Too bad for the dems there is nothing they can do about it.

Trump will be filling these two seats as well. Rumor is Ginsburg is under 24 hour medical assistance and refuses to retire until 2020.

a reply to: seagull

I want a Justice who will say it's wrong when its wrong, in their minds, or conversely, call it right, when it's right, in their minds.

Slight disagreement here...

I want a Justice who will say it's wrong when its wrong, per the Constitution, or conversely, call it right, when it's right, per the Constitution.

I know there are disagreements even among those who believe the Constitution as written. That doesn't concern me much, as long as the Justices go by the Constitution the way it reads, not the way they think it should read. The words matter. If one cannot make a logical argument based on the Constitution, then they are not reading the Constitution.

TheRedneck

a reply to: DBCowboy

Press Release from Bernie Sanders:

Sanders Statement on Supreme Court Nominee
Monday, July 9, 2018
WASHINGTON, July 9 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement Monday after President Donald Trump announced he is nominating Brett Kavanaugh to be an associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court:

"Let us be clear: President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh will be a rubber-stamp for an extreme, right-wing agenda pushed by corporations and billionaires. The coming Senate debate over the replacement of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is about the future of Roe v. Wade, campaign finance reform, voting rights, workers' rights, health care, climate change, environmental protection and gun safety.

"Brett Kavanaugh, contrary to 200 years of Supreme Court precedent, believes a president 'may decline to enforce a statute . . . when the president deems the statute unconstitutional.' He ruled against a migrant teenager seeking to be released from custody in order to obtain an abortion. He believes a president can only be indicted after he leaves office and should not be subjected to civil suits while in office. He ruled the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was unconstitutional. And he would not uphold the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate.

"I do not believe a person with those views should be given a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court. We must mobilize the American people to defeat Trump’s right-wing, reactionary nominee."

Contact: Josh_Miller-Lewis@sanders.senate.gov

Source: Sanders Response

My comment:

Why can't the Democrats see that calling Republicans "extreme and right wing" makes them lose all credibility.

The moment true extremists step onto the scene they won't have a label to give them, they've already used nazi, facist, bigot, xenophobe, racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, transphobic and many other slurs and labels.

When you have the Democrats openly pushing "Democratic Socialism" via way of civil unrest and public disturbance, the left seems to be on the extreme of things in the public viewpoint.

Not to say there aren't extremists on both sides of the political spectrum these days, however, these labels have lost their sting due to common usage.

Bernie Sanders said what everyone expected, it's like a conditioned response to be Anti-Anything-Trump.

This guy could be squeaky clean and he'd still be satan's russian step-son in the eyes of the Dems.

a reply to: Konduit

Ginsberg is one who needs to be replaced. She makes decisions based more on her opinion and partisan view than on the document she swore to uphold.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Konduit

Ginsberg is one who needs to be replaced. She makes decisions based more on her opinion and partisan view than on the document she swore to uphold.

TheRedneck

Since she's now (or will soon be) in the SCOTUS minority, maybe Ginsberg will hang up her robe, sooner rather than later.

a reply to: seeker1963

His hands weren’t tied. This pick is a huge red flag:

Kavanaugh is asked a fourth time what evidence he had that Foster's car was in the parking lot. Either Foster's car was there or it was not.

Brett Kavanaugh: Well at least we you know, at least you know, the Report, look the Report was trying to be honest about a few things, and ah, that, that, the people had complained about with the Fiske Report, and one of them was the fact that there were these cars and people saw different cars and different people. What about the people, I mean this gets to a problem, what about the people who seemed clearly to see ah, Foster's car, and described it as brown. So, people were screwed up on the colors, period.

Narrator: Kavanaugh is right, there is a problem.

Brett Kavanaugh: What about the people, I mean this gets to a problem. What about the people who seemed clearly to see ah, Foster's car, and described it as brown.

Narrator: Kavanaugh's statement that people clearly saw Foster's car is not true. Descriptions of a brown car are not descriptions of Foster's gray car. How does Kavanaugh resolve the problem?

Brett Kavanaugh: So, people were screwed up on the colors, period.

Narrator: Brett Kavanaugh called eyewitnesses "screwed up" because what they saw did not agree with the desired result. But Kavanaugh slipped up. He admitted that all of the police and medical personnel saw a brown car.

Brett Kavanaugh: Well it all comes down to that brown car issue, right? Ah, all the police and medical personnel that were in the park also described it as brown.

Narrator: The conclusion that Vincent Foster committed suicide depends on yet another provable lie – that Foster drove his children's gray Honda to Fort Marcy Park. Patrick Knowlton and all the other witnesses were correct. There was no gray car in the parking lot. We just heard Kavanaugh admit that all witnesses were consistent that the car was brown, proving that Foster did not drive his children's car to the park. Earlier in this audio, we heard Kavanaugh admit that the civilian witnesses reported seeing a brown car, and claimed to believe that all these civilians were all simply mistaken, or, "screwed up."

But twenty-four officials arrived at the park that night, and Kavanaugh admits that these twenty-four police and medical personnel all saw a brown car.

Brett Kavanaugh: Ah, all the police and medical personnel that were in the park also described it as brown.

Narrator: Kavanaugh learned of this evidence, disproving the suicide theory, from grand jury testimony. Yet, Kavanaugh knowingly withheld this evidence from Starr's Report on Foster's death, and submitted the Report to the United States Court of Appeals, to the Special Division for the Purpose of Appointing Independent Counsels.

Did Kenneth Starr knowingly allow John Bates and Brett Kavanaugh to submit a fraudulent Report to the United States Court of Appeals?

Kavanaugh was willing to do what Miquel Rodriguez was not willing to do: To lie.

Kavanaugh's lie that Vincent Foster drove to the park and killed himself was made to perpetuate the cover-up of the murder.

Link

Horrific nominee. He probably knows plenty of dirt on the Clintons...dirt that implicates him, too.

There’s no brilliant 4D chess move here. Kavanaugh is a bottom feeder in the swamp.

a reply to: Konduit


Clarence Thomas is only 70.
en.wikipedia.org...
Younger than Trump.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: xuenchen
😃😃

somebody is re-tweeting and old tweet from Harry Reid .........

Senator Harry Reid
‏Verified account @SenatorReid

Thanks to all of you who encouraged me to consider filibuster reform. It had to be done.

2:08 PM - 21 Nov 2013 💥😃💥

Think hrc would have picked this guy?
I don't.
Too bad for the dems there is nothing they can do about it.

Oh god yes. She owes him one.

a reply to: zGrimReapah

What do you expect from a hypocrite like Sanders, the self-proclaimed socialist who lives in $3 million dollar beach houses and whose wife is under investigation for bank fraud. Do as I say, not as I do... the old socialist mantra.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Yeah, I should have said it that way. Right to their way of thinking, as pertains to their reading of the Constitution.

I accept your correction.

a reply to: Konduit

Looking on twitter there is already comments on how Bret can interfere with the Mueller investigation because he believes a sitting president cannot be indicted or should be under any civil suits while in office.

Now the Dems are using the excuse that while Trump is under Criminal Investigation he shouldn't be able to pick any SCOTUS picks.

Trump isn't the main target of the investigation as far as I am aware so their current argument doesn't hold any weight, never the less, expect to hear this be repeated in the media.

Joe Scarborough apparently said on air (MSNBC afaik) that Trump picked Bret because he's a white guy, already the diversity card has been played, let's see how many other labels they can make stick to him before he's confirmed

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Konduit

Ginsberg is one who needs to be replaced. She makes decisions based more on her opinion and partisan view than on the document she swore to uphold.

TheRedneck

Pay attention to Sotomayor! I certainly don't see her decisions based on the Constitution either, but her opinion and partisan views. I have read her opinions in several cases and I honestly do not believe she has ever read the Constitution. If she has, it triggered her to the point she wants it destroyed.

a reply to: seeker1963

Oh, by no means do I limit my remarks to Ginsberg... she is just the one that seems to stand out in my mind. I have heard similar about Sotomayor as well.

Again, as long as a Justice decides cases based on the US Constitution and constitutional US law, I have no issue with any of them. When they go beyond that, I have a YUUUGE disagreement with them.

TheRedneck

So the pick is the guy the hard righters are calling a RINO for not being anti-abortion enough.

Dis gon' be fun.

a reply to: Nyiah

Think it has more to do with Vince Foster and the Bushes.

You have to remember...there are two more very very likely candidates in the next 6 years while Trump is in office. Ginsburg is in her 80's and Breyer is 79 and will be 80 in a few months. Hell, Clarence Thomas could step down just to give it to the man with what he went through..LOL.

Bottom line...the SCOTUS is a changing...

a reply to: matafuchs

Indeed.

Ever since the shady demise of Scalia.

Weird given all the outside context.