New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

Dr. Keith said:
There is another argument that he just isn't much better than mediocre. He hasn't really distinguished himself in any positive way in the profession compared to the other people who have gotten onto the bench.

I think there is a small chance that he may even be impeached or forced to resign. Not for what he has done, but just because he is the first person to be nominated who seems to care more about themselves than the court. He is the kind of person who may trip over his own self interest when trying to step up to such heights.
Click to expand...

Thomas more or less takes bribes via his wife, and he's still there.
 
theprestige said:
I'm pretty sure that if Kavanaugh had chosen to present a stoic front to the committee, progressives would have found that equally disqualifying.

"Doesn't he care?"

"A real man would have shown some upsetness at being accused of such things."

"Even a rapist would be smart enough to act outraged - if they were at all human."

"His robotic demeanor indicates exactly the kind of callous indifference to human suffering that we cannot tolerate in a high court justice."

Etc.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you can't read minds and don't own a crystal ball to see alternate universes with.
 
acbytesla said:
On the one hand I think Kavanaugh is horrible and definitely should not become a Supreme Court Justice. But OTOH, while his replacement nomination might not be a liar and a pig, he surely would be similar in his decisions.

So, it very well may be this is a case where the loser is the winner and vice versa. That this will stir up the women's vote leading to a blue tidal wave. We will see.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree, but I think there's a low but nonzero chance that Trump will refuse to nominate anyone who doesn't outright promise to protect him. So its Kavanaugh or nothing for the GOP, hence their desperation.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
I mostly agree, but I think there's a low but nonzero chance that Trump will refuse to nominate anyone who doesn't outright promise to protect him. So its Kavanaugh or nothing for the GOP, hence their desperation.
Click to expand...

Do you think Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, Alito will also protect Trump? I find it highly doubtful. Are you aware of opinions from them that suggest that they would reverse the unanimous previous decisions saying the President is not immune from subpoenas?

Now maybe I'm missing something and am wrong. It takes more than Kavanaugh to reverse those decisions.
 
quadraginta said:
NYT editorial board publishes article against Kavanaugh nomination.

Note; This is not just someone's letter to the op/ed page. This is the editorial board of the paper, which "represents the opinions of the board, its editor and the publisher. It is separate from the newsroom and the Op-Ed section."
Click to expand...

"Not Republican senators, who, after denying one president his legitimate authority to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court, are now rushing their own nominee through, uninterested in the truth, while weeping crocodile tears about other people’s partisanship."

NY Times lies, no reason to read further. The Majority has delayed the votes repeatedly.

they also claim that "key witnesses" were not interviewed. The actual witnesses were interviewed. The ones we know of from Ford are not key witnesses at all, **** they aren't even witnesses.

Not fit even to wrap a dead fish in.
 
theprestige said:
I'm pretty sure that if Kavanaugh had chosen to present a stoic front to the committee, progressives would have found that equally disqualifying.

"Doesn't he care?"

"A real man would have shown some upsetness at being accused of such things."

"Even a rapist would be smart enough to act outraged - if they were at all human."

"His robotic demeanor indicates exactly the kind of callous indifference to human suffering that we cannot tolerate in a high court justice."

Etc.
Click to expand...

You have some stock quip about imaginary people and tea parties whenever someone presupposes what conservatives might do or think.

Maybe start applying it to yourself.
 
acbytesla said:
Do you think Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, Alito will also protect Trump? I find it highly doubtful. Are you aware of opinions from them that suggest that they would reverse the unanimous previous decisions saying the President is not immune from subpoenas?

Now maybe I'm missing something and am wrong. It takes more than Kavanaugh to reverse those decisions.
Click to expand...

I don't think practicality is a consideration here. I'm just picturing Trump huddled over a cheeseburger, glowering at a potential nominee and saying he needs them in his court, or asking if they're on the same page, or some other plausibly-deniable-but-really-not overture, and from the ones which didn't immediately protest such a flagrantly illegal act, Kavanaugh is the best of a very bad lot.

That *probably* didn't happen, but it feels too truthy to discount altogether.
 
Or about why Trump and Republicans straight up lied to the American people about the FBI having free reign to question whoever they liked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom