Jump to content

President Donald J. Trump's Supreme Court Associate Justice Kavanaugh


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

From your link:

 

Let’s take a look at its errors, or at least the first four biggies:

1. Brakebill was not Justice Kavanaugh’s first ruling. If you so much as glance at the Court’s opinion, it’s hard to miss its second sentence: “JUSTICE KAVANAUGH took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.”

 

 

Kavanaugh took no part in gang rapes, either...but he did nonetheless.  

6 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

It's really, really important to retain the chairmanships in the House for investigative reasons and in the Senate for appointees. A lot of good work could be swept under the rug if the dems gain control.

 

It's most important to retain the House because otherwise they'll try to impeach everyone, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi third in line for the White House.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Kavanaugh took no part in gang rapes, either...but he did nonetheless.  

 

It's most important to retain the House because otherwise they'll try to impeach everyone, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi third in line for the White House.

The House can try to impeach people all they want but even if they do and send it to the Senate they'll never get the 67 votes. The Senate on the other hand still has a lot of lifetime judgeships to approve. During Trump's tenure he might even be able to flip the Ninth Circuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

The House can try to impeach people all they want but even if they do and send it to the Senate they'll never get the 67 votes. The Senate on the other hand still has a lot of lifetime judgeships to approve. During Trump's tenure he might even be able to flip the Ninth Circuit.

 

Doesn't matter if they don't get the votes in the Senate.  What matters is the House votes to impeach Trump and Kavanaugh.

 

So when the Democrats eventually return to power, they can say something something Trump impeached so something something something about Executive Orders and something something something about foreign policy and something something someting about those judges are illegitmate and something something something decisions they don't like that Kavanaugh voted for/against are illegitimate and something something shut up because you're a racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, /dev/null said:

 

Doesn't matter if they don't get the votes in the Senate.  What matters is the House votes to impeach Trump and Kavanaugh.

 

So when the Democrats eventually return to power, they can say something something Trump impeached so something something something about Executive Orders and something something something about foreign policy and something something someting about those judges are illegitmate and something something something decisions they don't like that Kavanaugh voted for/against are illegitimate and something something shut up because you're a racist.

 

Yes, this, pretty much.

 

Hell, after the shitshow we just saw involving Kavanaugh, you really think it matters that the Senate won't convict?  Senate Democrats will just throw accusation after innuendo after roadblock into the hearings to string out the "Trump's impeached, his presidency is illegitimate" narrative.

 

Side note: have the Democrats realized yet they have "grounds" to impeach three judges?  Kavanaugh, Thomas (for raping Anita Hill), and Gorsuch (as an illegal nomination who's in Garland's deserved seat.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

"Believe all women" was bulls hit from the beginning and it had nothing to do with Monica because that was proven to have happened and she was a willing adult participant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

"Believe all women" was bulls hit from the beginning and it had nothing to do with Monica because that was proven to have happened and she was a willing adult participant.

 

Of course, if it's anyone other than a Democrat, soliciting sexual favors from your interns is a gross abuse of your authority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

Of course, if it's anyone other than a Democrat, soliciting sexual favors from your interns is a gross abuse of your authority.

 

And was viewed as such even back in the dark ages we now refer to as the 90's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Magox said:

Nevada is supposed to be Democrats #1 pickup opportunity for a Senate seat and it had been looking that way.  They were up every single poll up until the Kavanaugh debacle.  Now 3 polls in a row show Heller up with latest poll showing up 7.

 

 

 

I would like to see the Ds take a bath.  Maybe that would convince them that their all racism/all sexism/all xenophobia/all anti semetism/anti-transphobia/anti-gay ism/all the time strategy doesn't work.  You'd think the 2016 election would have taught them that. 

 

I vote for Ds sometimes and I'd like to see them try to do something for their constituents as opposed to never ending investigations and name calling.

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I would like to see the Ds take a bath.  Maybe that would convince them that their all racism/all sexism/all xenophobia/all anti semetism/anti-transphobia/anti-gay ism/all the time strategy doesn't work.  You'd think the 2016 election would have taught them that. 

 

I vote for Ds sometimes and I'd like to see them try to do something for their constituents as opposed to never ending investigations and name calling.

 

You sound like you're where I was a couple of decades ago. I used to lean toward the democrats when I was younger, partially because I was a bit more idealistic then, but also because they were big on national defense, were staunchly anti-communist, and were significantly more pragmatic with regard to the economy. They no longer even remotely resemble the democrat party I used to support, and I no longer vote for any of them, even in races where they run unopposed.

 

 

Now that I think about it, it was more than 'a couple decades ago". It was more like four decades ago. &$#% I'm getting old.

Edited by Azalin
edited for accuracy
  • Like (+1) 3
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Magox said:

Nevada is supposed to be Democrats #1 pickup opportunity for a Senate seat and it had been looking that way.  They were up every single poll up until the Kavanaugh debacle.  Now 3 polls in a row show Heller up with latest poll showing up 7.

 

 


Welllllllllllllll I may have answered a few of those polls when I was at my MIL's house in Vegas, skewing things ever so slightly.

What can I say? I never get poll calls in NYS, and I just wanted to participate (and screw with the pollsters).  ?

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Haha (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


Welllllllllllllll I may have answered a few of those polls when I was at my MIL's house in Vegas, skewing things ever so slightly.

What can I say? I never get poll calls in NYS, and I just wanted to participate (and screw with the pollsters).  ?

That's the origin of my 73 yes old Vietnam vet black woman with 7 kids and a PhD.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/7/mazie-hirono-says-brett-kavanaugh-enters-supreme-c/

 

“He’s going to be on the Supreme Court with a huge taint and a big asterisk after his name,” said Ms. Hirono on ABC’s “This Week.” “The partisanship that he showed was astounding.”

 

 

 

 

 
3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I meant "nice try" to whoever posted it originally.

It was that Russian Teddy KGB trying to upset our midterms.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/7/mazie-hirono-says-brett-kavanaugh-enters-supreme-c/

 

“He’s going to be on the Supreme Court with a huge taint and a big asterisk after his name,” said Ms. Hirono on ABC’s “This Week.” “The partisanship that he showed was astounding.

 

 

 

It's stuff like this that keeps me from taking these people seriously.  this is far from an isolated case.  they think I'm stupid and will believe whatever they tell me.

Edited by reddogblitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

 

It's stuff like this that keeps me from taking these people seriously.  this is far from an isolated case.  they think I'm stupid and will believe whatever they tell me.

 

They don't think you're stupid.  They think enough people are stupid to buy that story that they can win elections.  And they're right.  But they don't think that you're personally stupid.

 

I can think you're stupid if you want, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/7/mazie-hirono-says-brett-kavanaugh-enters-supreme-c/

 

“He’s going to be on the Supreme Court with a huge taint and a big asterisk after his name,” said Ms. Hirono on ABC’s “This Week.” “The partisanship that he showed was astounding.”

 

 

 

 

Hirono has no business calling anyone a sexual predator if she is simultaneously mocking the size of their taint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a complaint to the Board of Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals of Debra S. Katz, Lisa J. Banks, and Michael R. Bromwich for violating the rules of professional responsibility in their representation of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee during the hearings on the nomination of the Honorable Brett Kavanaugh.

Dr. Ford’s lawyers neglected to inform their client that she could have been interviewed by female staffers at home, in private rather than the formal hearing in Washington, DC

 

According to the Judicial Watch complaint, by not informing their client Dr. Ford that Sen. Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee offered in a letter to “fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford… in California, or anywhere else, to obtain (her) testimony,” Katz, Banks, and Bromwich violated the following District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct:

Rule l.4(a) – A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.

Rule 1.4(b) – A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.


Judicial Watch Files Bar Complaint Against Christine Blasey Ford’s Lawyers

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gary M said:

Have they banned female reproductive rights abortion yet?

 

That's next week. This week the Court is focused on re-instituting slavery. November is take-away-grandma's-health-insurance month.

 

The wholesale slaughter of women and blacks by the Court's executioners begins in the December term.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

That's next week. This week the Court is focused on re-instituting slavery. November is take-away-grandma's-health-insurance month.

 

The wholesale slaughter of women and blacks by the Court's executioners begins in the December term.

 

December is "Sterilize Gays" month.  Slaughtering women isn't on the docket until March, after Kavanaugh rapes 'em all.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

December is "Sterilize Gays" month.  Slaughtering women isn't on the docket until March, after Kavanaugh rapes 'em all.

 

Quickly, why would we need to sterilize gays?

 

I could see genital mutilation and cauterization, but sterilization specifically doesn't make much sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...