Law Justice Brett Kavanaugh Megathread - Megathread for Brett Kavanaugh, US Supreme Court Justice

they're good justices, brentt

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/05/trump-picks-brett-kavanaugh-for-supreme-court.html

President Donald Trump has picked Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge with extensive legal credentials and a lengthy political record, to succeed Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the Supreme Court, NBC News reported.

Kavanaugh, 53, is an ideological conservative who is expected to push the court to the right on a number of issues including business regulation and national security. The favorite of White House Counsel Donald McGahn, Kavanaugh is also considered a safer pick than some of the more partisan choices who were on the president’s shortlist.

A graduate of Yale Law School who serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Kavanaugh has the traditional trappings of a presidential nominee to the high court.


If confirmed, the appellate judge would become the second young, conservative jurist Trump has put on the top U.S. court during his first term. Kavanaugh's confirmation would give the president an even bigger role in shaping U.S. policy for decades to come. The potential to morph the federal judiciary led many conservatives to support Trump in 2016, and he has not disappointed so far with the confirmation of conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and numerous federal judges.

At times, he has diverged from the Republican party’s ideological line on important cases that have come before him, including on the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 health care law which Kavanaugh has declined to strike down on a number of occasions in which it has come before him.

Anti-abortion groups quietly lobbied against Kavanaugh, pushing instead for another jurist on Trump’s shortlist, 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett, ABC News reported in the run-up to Trump’s announcement.

Kavanaugh received his current appointment in 2006 after five years in the George W. Bush administration, where he served in a number of roles including staff secretary to the president. He has been criticized for his attachment to Bush, as well as his involvement in a number of high-profile legal cases.

For instance, Kavanaugh led the investigation into the death of Bill Clinton’s Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster, and assisted in Kenneth Starr’s 1998 report outlining the case for Clinton’s impeachment.

Democrats criticized Kavanaugh’s political roles during his 2006 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Your experience has been most notable, not so much for your blue chip credentials, but for the undeniably political nature of so many of your assignments,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at the time.

“From the notorious Starr report, to the Florida recount, to the President’s secrecy and privilege claims, to post-9/11 legislative battles including the Victims Compensation Fund, to ideological judicial nomination fights, if there has been a partisan political fight that needed a very bright legal foot soldier in the last decade, Brett Kavanaugh was probably there,” Schumer said.

Kavanaugh's work on the Starr report has been scrutinized by Republicans who have said it could pose trouble for the president as he negotiates with special counsel Robert Mueller over the terms of a possible interview related to Mueller's Russia probe. The 1998 document found that Clinton's multiple refusals to testify to a grand jury in connection with Starr's investigation were grounds for impeachment.

In later years, Kavanaugh said that Clinton should not have had to face down an investigation during his presidency. He has said the indictment of a president would not serve the public interest.

Like Trump's first nominee to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh clerked for Kennedy. If he is confirmed, it will mark the first time ever that a current or former Supreme Court justice has two former clerks become justices, according to an article by Adam Feldman, who writes a blog about the Supreme Court.

Kavanaugh teaches courses on the separation of powers, the Supreme Court, and national security at Harvard Law School and Yale Law School, and does charitable work at St. Maria’s Meals program at Catholic Charities in Washington, D.C., according to his official biography.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ett-kavanaugh-nomination-by-a-28-point-margin

After a blistering confirmation battle, Justice Brett Kavanaugh will take his seat for oral arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court with a skeptical public, a majority of which opposed his nomination. However, Democrats may not be able to exploit this fact in the upcoming elections as much as they hope, because the independent voters overwhelmingly disapprove of their own handling of the nomination by a 28-point margin, a new CNN/SSRS poll finds.

Overall, just 41 percent of those polled said they wanted to see Kavanaugh confirmed, compared to 51 percent who said they opposed his confirmation. In previous CNN polls dating back to Robert Bork in 1987, no nominee has been more deeply underwater.

What's interesting, however, is even though Democrats on the surface would seem to have public opinion on their side, just 36 percent approved of how they handled the nomination, compared to 56 percent who disapproved. (Republicans were at 55 percent disapproval and 35 percent approval). A further breakdown finds that 58 percent of independents disapproved of the way the Democrats handled the nomination — compared to 30 percent who approved. (Independents also disapproved of Republicans handling of the matter, but by a narrower 53 percent to 32 percent margin).

Many people have strong opinions on the way the Kavanaugh nomination will play out in November and who it will benefit. The conventional wisdom is that it will help Democrats in the House, where there are a number of vulnerable Republicans in suburban districts where losses among educated women could be devastating, and that it will help Republicans in the Senate, where the tossup races are in red states where Trump and Kavanaugh are more popular.

That said, it's clear that the nomination energized both sides, and that the tactics pursued by the parties turned off independent voters in a way that makes it much harder to predict how this will end up affecting election outcomes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"All in all, the facts don't matter."
This is the singular stupidest and worst thing you can ever say if you want to present your side as rational and logical.

If "the facts don't matter", then I want to claim sexual assault from that woman, and have everyone LISTEN AND BELIEVE it.
 
Last edited:
Bit of :powerlevel:, but fuck it. I need to vent it out. I got into an argument/slapfight with a former-coworker on Facebook (yes, a great use of my time, I know) and see declared that Kavanaugh was guilty because she was sexually abused as a child. I tried to argue that an FBI investigation was unlikely to uncover any new information, and that the witnesses Ford put forward couldn't corroborate her claims. That didn't sway her in the least as it just came down to, "believe the victims" because of her own experience. The thing that chilled me the most was when she said, "All in all, the facts don't matter."

That's when I knew that there was no reaching her. The Democrats practically use people like her to advance their agenda and cloud the issue with emotion. Justice is supposed to be blind for a reason.

On the off chance she has a husband or son you should ask her a hypothetical -- if either of them got accused of a rape she knows they didn't commit and their accuser said that, would she still be okay with the "listen and believe" and "feels over reals, facts don't matter" dogma?
 
This is the singular stupidest thing you can ever say if you want to present your side as rational and logical.

If "the facts don't matter", then I want to claim sexual assault from that woman, and have everyone LISTEN AND BELIEVE it.

I think a really good one to nail them with is this:

I was listening to a clip on Hannity yesterday afternoon; some Soros-paid agitator teary eyed woman confronted Lindsey Graham, weeping and screaming and saying I'm a victim how dare you HURF BLURF and his response was, "If your son or husband was being falsely accused would you or would you not demand due process." That fucking shut her up. Wish I could find the clip.
 
This is the singular stupidest thing you can ever say if you want to present your side as rational and logical.

If "the facts don't matter", then I want to claim sexual assault from that woman, and have everyone LISTEN AND BELIEVE it.

Agreed. I don't believe my former co-worker finished high school, though a post-secondary education is worthless if it's one of those gender/race/queer studies. Most of the mob assembled in front of the SCOTUS were conditioned to believe what their radical professors tell them. Critical thinking is their kryptonite so they have no choice but to double down.
 
Critical thinking is their kryptonite so they have no choice but to double down.

Ironic that the doctrine that they were indoctrinated into is called Critical Theory. As you say, Critical Thinking is toxic to the feels of the woke mind. Is there any hope for deprogramming any of the woke crowd further down the line or will they be cultists for life?
 
Has anyone shared this yet? I could almost see this happening.

Doru_oLU8AAOvW3.jpg
 
I have an illustrative story about Dianne Feinstein. There was a series of brutal murders in San Francisco you've all probably heard of. Richard Ramirez, the Night Stalker. San Francisco was in a panic, the police were working the case very hard. They did have one certain piece of physical evidence. Most of the crime scenes had a very distinctive sneaker print. The police experts knew that they could absolutely by matched to a specific pair of sneakers. This was their strongest evidence, and its existence was kept completely secret by the police.

In the middle of the panic, Dianne Feinstein the mayor of San Francisco demanded a briefing on the case. A completely legitimate request. The police gave her a comprehensive look at the case and presented their evidence to her. This must be kept completely secret, the police said. We can match shoeprints when we catch the guy. We'll have rock solid proof. But if word gets out about the shoeprints the guy'll ditch his shoes. Our ability to prove our case will be hugely damaged. You can't tell anyone. Oh yes, she said. I understand.

The next day she held a press conference and blew the whole thing. Homicide detectives were apparently screaming at their TVs in fury. Because the Night Stalker could be watching. Because he would throw away his shoes. And that's just what happened.

What this says about Feinstein's judgement, instincts and attitude towards confidential information I leave to you.

Edit: Yes, he killed again
 
Last edited:
I have an illustrative story about Dianne Feinstein. There was a series of brutal murders in San Francisco you've all probably heard of. Richard Ramirez, the Night Stalker. San Francisco was in a panic, the police were working the case very hard. They did have one certain piece of physical evidence. Most of the crime scenes had a very distinctive sneaker print. The police experts knew that they could absolutely by matched to a specific pair of sneakers. This was their strongest evidence, and its existence was kept completely secret by the police.

In the middle of the panic, Dianne Feinstein the mayor of San Francisco demanded a briefing on the case. A completely legitimate request. The police gave her a comprehensive look at the case and presented their evidence to her. This must be kept completely secret, the police said. We can match shoeprints when we catch the guy. We'll have rock solid proof. But if word gets out about the shoeprints the guy'll ditch his shoes. Our ability to prove our case will be hugely damaged. You can't tell anyone. Oh yes, she said. I understand.

The next day she held a press conference and blew the whole thing. Homicide detectives were apparently screaming at their TVs in fury. Because the Night Stalker could be watching. Because he would throw away his shoes. And that's just what happened.

What this says about Feinstein's judgement, instincts and attitude towards confidential information I leave to you.
At one time, leftist radicals (specifically, the New World Liberation Front or NWLF) targeted Feinstein with a bomb attack.

I wonder sometimes if things would've been better if they'd succeeded in getting her.
 
Like Trump, with all else failing, the left has been back to arguing all morning that he doesn't have the temperament for such a high institution. How dare he's not a robot powered by (((special interests))) reading a teleprompter, yet calling the Constitution a fucking living, breathing document like all of Obama and Clinton's judicial activists is completely fine.

If he really does have anger management issues, it would be great to see him screeching at RGB so loud, that it blows the skin off of her corpse.
 
LMAO Heidi ur done here.
tl;dr Heitkamp says she's voting "no" on Kav. She's already underwater by 6 points per the RCP average, and this will not help, to say the least.
I guess she figures that she can't win with honor, so she might as well lose with spite.

She's a democrat towing the party line, this isn't a surprise at all.
 
LMAO Heidi ur done here.
tl;dr Heitkamp says she's voting "no" on Kav. She's already underwater by 6 points per the RCP average, and this will not help, to say the least.
I guess she figures that she can't win with honor, so she might as well lose with spite.

Nope. That reminds me, I gotta go apply for my absentee vote and place my vote from Kevin Kramer as opposed to Heidi. Thanks for the reminder, Heitkamp!

EDIT:

She's a democrat towing the party line, this isn't a surprise at all.

Yeah, here the land of the Nords, her big game is that she rallying about how she all about hometown values, and while she is a democrat, she tries to convince everyone she doesn't vote constantly along the party line, etc. etc.

And while I'm not the biggest proponent for Kramer, I'm not going to give my vote to someone who would condone this kind of witchhunt.
 
Last edited:
LMAO Heidi ur done here.
tl;dr Heitkamp says she's voting "no" on Kav. She's already underwater by 6 points per the RCP average, and this will not help, to say the least.
I guess she figures that she can't win with honor, so she might as well lose with spite.
Makes sense as the Republicans appear to be getting ND anyway, so she might as well secure herself some Democratic back-pats and party positions. Cynical, but logical.

:offtopic: Also, did Matthew Heimbach from that weird Nazi cuck cult move to Fargo and kill an infant? I clipped this image from the source you linked. I swear physiognomy guys. It's coming back.
Capture.PNG

Edit: uhh guys that was a joke about Heimbach. I think they just look similar
 
Last edited:
Even CNN can't ignore the horrible truth that's dawning on them.

View attachment 558878

When NPR, CNN and The Hill all start singing the "Oh shit, we fucked up." tune, you know dark days are ahead, because they sugar-coat everything for the Left.

If the FBI investigation leaks, I bet we find out that Ford is tied to the DNC, Feinstein or some other Leftwing operation by the evidence.
 
Back