Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmation hearings - Day 2 /sigh

Day 2 - We already have about 3 5 people removed from the gallery.

Fox


C-Span


Today starts the question and answer portion of our circus. Each Senator gets 30 minutes to question the Judge. The hearing will go until all Senators on the committee have had their chance. They then move to round 2 however I have no idea what the requirements are for it.

Dammit , why isn't he on Feinsteins wavelength...

originally posted by: Infoshill
Dammit , why isn't he on Feinsteins wavelength...

That is a good thing.

a reply to: Infoshill

Feinstein : "Hundreds of school shootings using assault rifles"?

She just flat out lied there.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks buddy

Kavanaugh speaking on Heller right now, very articulate and clear

Feinstein's line of questioning is professional at least, if not a bit loaded w/ emotional red herrings

a reply to: Xcathdra

I just find it hillarious how each dem senator tries to insist Kavanaugh recind his appt, because they know hes a sure thing and they want some sweet sound bites for their upcoming elections.

boobs

Feinstein- “ how can you reconcile your belief on guns” uhhh it’s a right

originally posted by: avgguy
Feinstein- “ how can you reconcile your belief on guns” uhhh it’s a right

She loves to invoke the Heller ruling because it left open the door for Congress to be able to regulate some types of weapons. As the judge pointed out, and she ignores (every time) is the "litmus test" put into place to determine whether regulating a certain type of fire arm is reasonable.

Common use is the standard.

a reply to: pavil

Not to mention her entire premise on assault weapons is based on a factually incorrect use of the term... semi automatic rifles are not assault weapons per definition.

Further, her saying ownership and possession doesn't equal use is fallacious and laughable.

Why would you own property if not to use it? Even if it sits in a safe it is being used for something (i.e. acquiring value, being stored for future use, etc.)

In the Nixon ruling the Supreme Court ONLY viewed the argument that Nixons team provided - executive privilege.

Executive privilege is not spelled out in the constitution so was and still is open to review and interpretation by the courts. They noted in their ruling that had Nixons team did a better job of presenting their argument it might have gone in their favor. That left the door open for future Presidents to invoke executive privilege in a manner like Nixons with a possible different outcome.

Their decision in that case required Nixon to turn over the tapes. It did not say and was not asked if what the President did was obstruction.

So I take it the stunt the Democrats pulled yesterday blew up in their faces - again.

They seem to be behaving more civilized today (but it is still early).

Don't like this guy - it seems like he saying what he thinks people want to hear.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Don't like this guy - it seems like he saying what he thinks people want to hear.

The judge or Sen. Hatch?

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: UKTruth
Don't like this guy - it seems like he saying what he thinks people want to hear.

The judge or Sen. Hatch?

The judge.
My reading of him is that he is corrupt - but just a feeling.

Kind of wish he would have explained to Feinstein that thousands upon thousands (upon thousands) of US citizens use semi automatic rifles at shooting ranges and in competition daily. Guess he figured she’d never grasp that concept since she represents Kalifonistahn.

a reply to: UKTruth

Based on? He seems to have profound and varied glowing references, is very well spoken and seems honest to me...

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: UKTruth
Don't like this guy - it seems like he saying what he thinks people want to hear.

The judge or Sen. Hatch?

The judge.
My reading of him is that he is corrupt - but just a feeling.

Not corrupt, nor stating just what people want to hear. He is refusing to let the Dems trap him, which is the intelligent thing to do. It was already made clear he wasn’t going to thumbs up or thumbs down any judicial rulings. Like the main stream media, the Dems like to pretend they didn’t already hear the answer.

Kavanaugh keeps citing his experience in Bush Whitehouse...that might open the door for the documents to be released...

originally posted by: UKTruth
Don't like this guy - it seems like he saying what he thinks people want to hear.

These confirmation hearings are minefields, where half the Senators intentionally try to trip the nominee up. They know how to try and navigate that.

He seems to be doing good, brushed off the interruptions during his answers from the gallery.

Plus every SC nominee never responds to hypotheticals or how they would rule on a specific case.

a reply to: Lab4Us

I also like that he isn't arguing but simply sticking to his principle of legal presidency and judicial independence, even though I 100% agree with you.