Dick Allen Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Kavanaugh is the pick. That was obvious considering he thinks Republican Presidents should be protected from criminal investigations and lawsuits. He did work on the Starr Report. The only question was would his being tight with the Bushes make Trump oook elsewhere. But his thought on Republican Presidents being above the law easily won out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 5 minutes ago, raBBit said: In before Kavanugh is racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic and/or we need a revolution. Irrespective of his credentials they should wait until after the election. That's the precedent and it should be followed. I haven't read his opinions but the fact he debunked a Clinton conspiracy theory shows he at least has some bipartisanship. All I really care is thst the judge makes consistent rulings. If you're states rights, support them whether it's a Republican or Democrat state etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Senate Democrats are sure to press Kavanaugh to explain his views on investigating and impeaching a president based on allegations of lies and a cover-up, something that could prove uncomfortable for Trump given the investigation underway by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. A graduate of Yale University and Yale Law School, Kavanaugh — the only one of Trump’s four finalists who has an Ivy League degree — will be in good company on a court where all the current justices have gone to law school at Harvard or Yale. Last year, Trump said he was drawn to his first appointee, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, because he had degrees from Columbia, Harvard and Oxford. Some conservative activists in recent days had launched a campaign against Kavanaugh, complaining about his past ties to the George W. Bush administration and previous rulings that were not hard-line enough for their taste. Many preferred one of the candidates who had worked outside of Washington, despite their less sterling resumes. The other finalists, also federal appeals court judges, were Amy Coney Barrett of Indiana, Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania and Raymond Kethledge of Michigan. But lawyers who have worked with Kavanaugh are confident he will be boldly conservative. “Brett Kavanaugh is courageous, tough and defiant. He will never, ever go wobbly,” said Justin Walker, a University of Louisville law professor who worked as law clerk for both Kavanaugh and Justice Kennedy. “I predict that he would be a rock-solid conservative in the Alito-Thomas mold,” he said, referring to Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Clarence Thomas. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-20180709-story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/09/us/mexican-man-beaten-brick-los-angeles/index.html Meanwhile, a 92 year old Hispanic man was getting beaten by cinder blocks while the (attacking) mom’s 4 year old watched... Usually not a GoFundMe fan , but this one seems to be a worthwhile donation and has really blown up quickly. Edited July 10, 2018 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerksticks Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 hour ago, raBBit said: In before Kavanugh is racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic and/or we need a revolution. I got you down for being in here before his dirty past was created out of thin air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 hour ago, raBBit said: In before Kavanugh is racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic and/or we need a revolution. Reblogging this post will be one of the only bright spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 THEY TOOK 'ER SUPREME COURT SEAT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Well yeah, you explicitly did. We nominated a person, a person that even Republicans said was too moderate for Obama to nominate, you literally said we will not confirm him or vote for him even though he would have passed his nomination, and then tossed that same rule away this time. That literally happened. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) this sounds pretty corrupt from all parties: Kennedy was deciding on, among other things, Trump's travel ban and other issues about his administration while at the same time he's negotiation his replacement with the very same President, and they just so happen to settle on a guy who doesn't think a President can be held criminally or even civilly accountable for his actions. Trump's given away his power in choosing judges to outside conservative interest groups and now even sitting justices themselves. Democrats really need to be ready to reform the structure of the Supreme Court and pack it with anti-reactionaries or we're doomed to a generation of Lochner 2.0. there's also this: Quote Mr. Trump was apparently referring to Justice Kennedy’s son, Justin. The younger Mr. Kennedy spent more than a decade at Deutsche Bank, eventually rising to become the bank’s global head of real estate capital markets, and he worked closely with Mr. Trump when he was a real estate developer, according to two people with knowledge of his role. During Mr. Kennedy’s tenure, Deutsche Bank became Mr. Trump’s most important lender, dispensing well over $1 billion in loans to him for the renovation and construction of skyscrapers in New York and Chicago at a time other mainstream banks were wary of doing business with him because of his troubled business history. Edited July 10, 2018 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Anyone in the Democratic party that votes for this guy should face a primary challenger. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Heitkamp, Manchin, Donnelly, Doug Jones...definitely are on the watch list. Second tier, Tester and McCaskill, although the latter would be shocking because of Roe v. Wade and her state’s GOP being in total chaos...and her opponent barely running a campaign until recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 13 hours ago, raBBit said: In before Kavanugh is racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic and/or we need a revolution. Ah yes, the board's self-proclaimed "independent" voter who spends 99.9999% of her time s*****g on anything remotely left of center and defends everything alt-right, conservative, and right wing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 (edited) Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court Nomination Is Bad News for an Open Internet https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/brett-kavanaughs-supreme-court-nomination-is-bad-news-for-net-neutrality.html Edited July 10, 2018 by BigSqwert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Trump just pardoned the Hammonds, who forcefully took over a federal facility in Oregon(and busted the place up while doing so). So hey, commit a felony against the federal government and you are all good I guess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Regardless of credentials, I agree with the other posters who have said that the Senate has established a precedent that should be followed. No nominee should be confirmed until after the election. And yes, no matter what your party affiliation is or isn't, the reality is that the Senate GOP pretty much stole the Gorsuch seat by setting a new precedent that never before existed in order to win one for their "team". But now that it's the rule, it's the rule. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 9 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said: Trump just pardoned the Hammonds, who forcefully took over a federal facility in Oregon(and busted the place up while doing so). So hey, commit a felony against the federal government and you are all good I guess just to be clear, this isn't the Bundys or anyone else involved in the actual occupation. those people were already mostly acquitted in October 2016 these are the ranchers who got sent to prison for a) deliberately setting fires on public land to destroy evidence of illegal hunting, endangering hunters who were camped nearby, which they knew about because they flew their private plane over the area to survey it before their hunt b) setting fires on public land while a burn ban was in effect, endangering firefighters and hunters that were camped nearby and although they were never prosecuted for it, they had a history of child abuse. for example, when 16-year-old Dusty Hammond got a tattoo on his chest, they removed it...with sandpaper (it was reported to the police, but the Hammonds got the charges dropped by agreeing to enter into a diversion program instead) very fine people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 If you commit a crime and get sent to prison, have your attorney get a letter to Trump letting him know you voted for him. Get pardoned. Plead guilty? Very unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 17 hours ago, raBBit said: In before Kavanugh is racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic and/or we need a revolution. 19 minutes ago, raBBit said: Definitely dont defend everything right. I don't even like it the appointment. I just like that a lot of bad people will be angered by it. So, the gays, other races, and trans people are the bad people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 20 minutes ago, raBBit said: Definitely dont defend everything right. I don't even like it the appointment. I just like that a lot of bad people will be angered by it. Who are the bad people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Im thinking regular US citizens because Kavanaugh has supported warrantless NSA surveillance: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/396251-amash-slams-kavanaugh-over-views-on-government-surveillance 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Muggles, that's who the bad people are, Muggles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 hour ago, NorthSideSox72 said: Regardless of credentials, I agree with the other posters who have said that the Senate has established a precedent that should be followed. No nominee should be confirmed until after the election. And yes, no matter what your party affiliation is or isn't, the reality is that the Senate GOP pretty much stole the Gorsuch seat by setting a new precedent that never before existed in order to win one for their "team". But now that it's the rule, it's the rule. McConnell is behaving here like the annoying kid in your grade school. He keeps changing the rules to ensure that he wins. Yes, McConnell says, we can't consider a Supreme Court Justice in an election year - but only if it's a PRESIDENTIAL election. Obviously he didn't mean the midterms! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinilaw08 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, raBBit said: Cmon man. Dude, you are the one who said that you are happy with this because "a lot of bad people will be angered by it." Just as an easy example, Kennedy was the deciding vote in Obergfell, which said that the Constitution protected gay marriage. The vote was 5-4. If Kavanaugh is more conservative than Kennedy (definitely the case based on his time at the DC Circuit), it is reasonable to conclude that gay rights at SCOTUS could be negatively impacted by the confirmation of Kavanaugh. Without specifying what bad people you are so glad this appointment will troll, you seem to be flat out ignoring the fact that SCOTUS decisions make a tangible impact on actual people's lives... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 1 minute ago, illinilaw08 said: Dude, you are the one who said that you are happy with this because "a lot of bad people will be angered by it." Just as an easy example, Kennedy was the deciding vote in Obergfell, which said that the Constitution protected gay marriage. The vote was 5-4. If Kavanaugh is more conservative than Kennedy (definitely the case based on his time at the DC Circuit), it is reasonable to conclude that gay rights at SCOTUS could be negatively impacted by the confirmation of Kavanaugh. Without specifying what bad people you are so glad this appointment will troll, you seem to be flat out ignoring the fact that SCOTUS decisions make a tangible impact on actual people's lives... Hell, it's bigger than that. Sodomy laws making gay sex illegal are still on the books in 12 states and they are only unenforceable because of a 2003 Supreme Court decision declaring those laws unconstitutional where the dissenters were Thomas, Scalia, and Rehnquist. The dissent by Thomas wrote that there was no "write to privacy" in the constitution - that's the same standard that is used to argue against abortion rights, Roe v. Wade is explicitly a right to privacy decision. When that case falls, the logic behind the government being unable to declare being gay a crime falls also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts