Kavanaugh hearing

[Sean Hayden]

Do we really not have a thread for this? It's one of the most fascinating things I've ever listened to. I could do without the protesters though. I can't even understand what those idiots are yelling.

Who else is listening and what do you make of it, him? He sounds very intelligent and reasonable. (not counting his comment about self-pardoning of course )

[laklak]

No question he's a smart dude, he's got massive judicial chops, and is widely respected by the legal community. His positions (the ones I've read) seem well thought out and fair. And he'll be confirmed, even if by a margin of 1. Cue Democratic Doomsday Derangement Syndrome in 3.....2.....1....

It is beyond me why they're allowing the protesters, it's the most transparent and ridiculous political theater I've ever seen and I was around for Watergate so that's saying something.

[Svartalf]

But is he the equal of the legal mind Scalia was, no matter I can disagree with some of the decisions he had?
At least, he was on the right side of Kelo vs New London, proving that a conservative can be an honest man.

[Tero]

Just because we can't pass any amendment, to clarify what the government can do or not do, the court is a joke.
- Roe vs Wade: just pass an amendmet
-Bush wins over Gore on hanging chaffs
-Court decided if Obamacare can force people to buy insurance: commerce clause

Every smart candidate, left of right, will refuse certain questions. They must be sitting there going "you must be kidding?", how do I refuse this politely.

[Seabass]

No question he's a smart dude, he's got massive judicial chops, and is widely respected by the legal community. His positions (the ones I've read) seem well thought out and fair. And he'll be confirmed, even if by a margin of 1. Cue Democratic Doomsday Derangement Syndrome in 3.....2.....1....

It is beyond me why they're allowing the protesters, it's the most transparent and ridiculous political theater I've ever seen and I was around for Watergate so that's saying something.

Dude, he thinks sitting presidents shouldn't be investigated, which basically would put presidents above the law. That alone should disqualify him imo. Plus, he's rabidly anti-abortion. We don't need more religious loonies on the court.

[Sean Hayden]

I heard Democrats trying to make out that he believed that, but I didn't get that from him. Maybe it was in another part or something he's written?

I have to say my confidence in the "dirt" brought against people on either side from either side is at an all time low. I just don't buy it. Go look into the "lying" he supposedly did with regards to his involvement in policies allowing torture. That's some seriously shaky shit. Some people appear willing to accept that he lied on account of a senator's email accusing him of lying. The senator's reasoning itself doesn't do much to support the accusation either.

[laklak]

He said that Roe is "settled law", and the only case you could even stretch to an anti-abortion stance was his dissenting opinion that an illegal immigrant minor in detention did not have a right to abortion. That's a pretty specific ruling and does not address Roe-v-Wade in any way. He didn't say sitting presidents "shouldn't be investigated", he said "Congress could consider a law exempting a President, while in office, from criminal prosecution and investigation". He also said impeachment would remain an option even if that law was passed. If Obama had nominated him the left would be fawning over him as a "principled centrist". It's all spin. All of it.

[pErvinalia]

".... Obama ...."

You went full 42. Never go full 42...

[Sean Hayden]

One aspect of his record worth exploring more is his supposed tendency to always side with corporate interests. If that's true then I'd worry about it.

[Tero]

Just like Trump. White working class was fooled. Trump is consistently on corporation side not worker.

[Seabass]

He said that Roe is "settled law", and the only case you could even stretch to an anti-abortion stance was his dissenting opinion that an illegal immigrant minor in detention did not have a right to abortion. That's a pretty specific ruling and does not address Roe-v-Wade in any way.

He is Federalist Society approved. That would not be the case unless he were anti-abortion.
His idol is William Rehnquist, who dissented in Roe v Wade.
Trump gets his judicial picks from Leonard Leo.
Here's info on Leonard Leo:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/201 ... story.html
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/ju ... n-abortion
And of course there are the leaked emails:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/pl ... t-unmasked
And forcing a young woman, illegal or not, to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term is fucking barbaric.
During his campaign, Trump promised to choose only anti-abortion judges.

Looks like a duck to me...

He didn't say sitting presidents "shouldn't be investigated", he said "Congress could consider a law exempting a President, while in office, from criminal prosecution and investigation". He also said impeachment would remain an option even if that law was passed.

He said Congress should pass a law:

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/9/17551584/b ... estigation
Kavanaugh wrote in an article for the Minnesota Law Review from 2009 that Congress should pass a law “exempting a President—while in office—from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel.”

“I believe that the President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office,” Kavanaugh wrote. “We should not burden a sitting President with civil suits, criminal investigations, or criminal prosecutions.” Furthermore, Kavanaugh opined that the “indictment and trial of a sitting President” would “cripple the federal government.”

Now, this is in the context of calling for Congress to change existing law — not for the Supreme Court to interpret it differently. However, these beliefs and opinions could well influence how Kavanaugh would rule on the major topics related to civil or criminal investigations that do end up reaching the Supreme Court.

If Obama had nominated him the left would be fawning over him as a "principled centrist".

Yeaahh, I don't think so....

[laklak]

I think he's right about prosecuting a sitting president, but I don't expect you to agree. However, the next time there's a Democratic president and a Republican congress, which will absolutely happen, you might feel differently, because they're going to make the Clinton impeachment look like a garden party. You thought you saw "obstruction" under Obama?

They're all slime molds, every single one of them. Anyone buying into party politics is a deluded pawn. Anyone who thinks one side are Good Guys and the other side are Bad Guys is, well, naïve is the most polite description. The shot callers in the smoky back rooms are laughing at the SJWs, at the alt-right, at everyone, as they fleece you, send your kids into meaningless wars, destroy your civil rights and privacy, track your every move and record every conversation. They'd record your bloody thoughts if they had the tech. If you actually think the "progressives" are any different then you're very sadly mistaken, it's just the same old shit with a proletarian veneer. Oh, sure, they'll give away a little more free shit, that sure ain't gonna hurt the patrician class. It's fucking chump change to them.

But, the panem et circuses keeps the proles occupied, along with a steady diet of fake news, sophomoric memes, high fructose corn syrup, and reality TV.

[pErvinalia]

High fructose corn syrup...

[Seabass]

Anyone buying into party politics is a deluded pawn. Anyone who thinks one side are Good Guys and the other side are Bad Guys is, well, naïve is the most polite description.

I don't necessarily buy into party politics or see Democrats as good guys and Republicans as bad guys. The way I see it, we have a cultural divide between secular liberalism and religious conservatism. Secular liberalism leads to western, and eventually northern Europe, while religious conservatism leads to third world misery, poverty, bigotry, tribalism, etc.

Do I think the Dems are perfect? Of course not. But I do see Dems vs Reps as 1st world party vs 3rd world party.

[Śiva]

Does anyone know how long the detained girl, who was the concern of the ruling by the DC Circuit last October, had been pregnant when the ruling was delivered?