Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

"As a Democrat who wrote..." surely seems credible enough.  

And your first clause is laughable, we've read for several months what you want.

I hope Corey Booker knows about this.

(09-07-2018, 02:21 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

"As a Democrat who wrote..." surely seems credible enough.  

And your first clause is laughable, we've read for several months what you want.

That's literally the definition of partisanship, man.
I thought you claimed to be independent?

(09-07-2018, 02:58 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 02:21 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]"As a Democrat who wrote..." surely seems credible enough.  

And your first clause is laughable, we've read for several months what you want.

That's literally the definition of partisanship, man.
I thought you claimed to be independent?

Being skeptical of a source with a vested interest in the defeat of the target? And I'm not in the Independent Party though I do despise the Left much more than the Right.

(09-07-2018, 03:27 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 02:58 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]That's literally the definition of partisanship, man.
I thought you claimed to be independent?

Being skeptical of a source with a vested interest in the defeat of the target? And I'm not in the Independent Party though I do despise the Left much more than the Right.

I'm skeptical too, but this source is credible because the e-mail messages her article discusses are real.  They came from the DoJ and the Senate's Sargeant at Arms.

He will be confirmed before Oct 1. Next? RBG will retire and Trump will appoint another judge who actually respects the constitution, being responsible for 1/3 of the SCOTUS.

2 more scoops of winning.

(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

(09-07-2018, 08:50 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

So we have a lefty rag tearing him to shreds and an alt-right circus fighting back.

This, my friends, is what you call a popcorn moment. Heat up a bag and enjoy the show.

I saw a response about the confirmation from Ben Sasse. He nails all the ills about this entire circus. Should he ever run for president I am all in to the point of quiting my job and campaigning for him.

(09-07-2018, 08:50 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

Your article addresses a few different allegations from different people.  I only agree with one of the allegations, that Kavanaugh lied to Congress.  The link it made to Vox was more helpful.

"In sum, do I think future Justice Kavanaugh perjured himself? I don’t. Do I think he’s been less than forthcoming? Absolutely. Do I think he’s been more troublingly less than forthcoming than previous nominees? I do. Do I think we have less access to documents than we have with previous nominees? Yes. But I don’t think that he perjured himself."

The essay I posted invoked obstruction of justice and impeachment, not perjury, and only in the narrow context that "If President Clinton deserved to be impeached for obstructing justice, so does Kavanaugh." So the National Review and Vox are sort of strawmanning the Slate article.
I don't think a fair minded person can deny that Kavanaugh knew memos that he used to promote his goals were obtained illegally and unethically.
Trump could have done better.  I would withdraw him and nominate another person not tied to this episode of stolen memos.

(09-07-2018, 08:50 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 01:50 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but, at what price?
http://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/...rings.html

This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

But Mikey soooo badly wants a conservative nomination! He wouldn't possibly swallow that kind of partisan character assassination, would he?

(09-07-2018, 08:56 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 08:50 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

So we have a lefty rag tearing him to shreds and an alt-right circus fighting back.

This, my friends, is what you call a popcorn moment. Heat up a bag and enjoy the show.

If you think National Review is alt-right you are totally clueless. In particular the author, David French, is a virulent Never-Trumpist.

Hopefully this works.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJK2JveCAbI

Senator Sasse.

Still waiting for the thick-headed Dems to figure out Kavanaugh covered up a very famous murder.  But I suspect the Dems would vote en masse TO CONFIRM his nomination if they knew. 

After all, who wouldn't want to own their own personal Supreme Court Justice?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/po...foster.htm

Kavanaugh wrote the report concluding Vince Foster's death was a suicide, after being assigned to replace the original investigator (I believe Garcia was his name) who was convinced it was a homicide.  

Don't bother reading the report - it's a whitewash.  The key findings are actually in the appendix.  The judicial panel who reviewed Kavanaugh's report insisted that certain materials be added as an appendix to the report.  This was extremely unusual.  The 3-judge panel was from the DC Appellate Court which Kavanaugh later served on. Most copies you will find do not include the footnotes or appendix.  You have to search for the appendix separately.  It is interesting reading.

A young man, Patrick Knowlton, facing a 2-hour commute home, pulled into Ft. Marcy Park to relieve himself, and stumbled upon at least one of the crew dumping Foster's body.  The FBI tried for hours to talk him out of his testimony, saying he was mistaken about the make and model of the car he saw.  Knowlton would not budge so FBI agent Larry Monroe simply falsified Knowlton's testimony.

Kavanaugh was also behind an aggressive intimidation program against Mr. Knowlton, using at least 25 agents, after it was discovered that the FBI had falsified Knowlton's testimony.  After the blatant intimidation tactics, also documented in the appendix, Knowlton and his attorney stormed into the Ken Starr offices and demanded to know what the hell was going on.  Others present at the time said Kavanaugh slunk down in his chair like a cornered rat.  But Kavanaugh should not have been worried.  He was a made man now.  

2 other citizens saw the same mid-80s rust brown Honda with Arkansas plates which was NOT Vince Foster's car.  Foster's silver-blue 1989 Honda was moved to the parking area at least 3 hours after the time of Foster's death, confirmed by autopsy reports.

PDF of the appendix:
http://fbicover-up.com/ewExternalFiles/P...0Vol.2.pdf

Also note that Kavanaugh was so obsessed with "conspiracy theories" regarding Foster's death, that he insisted the investigation be reopened 4 years later, wasting an additional $2 million and making a big stink about collecting fibers from White House carpets.  This was to disprove the "conspiracy theory" that since carpet fibers were found on Foster's clothing, it could indicate Foster was wrapped in a carpet and dumped.  There was also a mention of the "long blonde hairs" found on Foster's body, but I dunno if that was in the official autopsy.  It was mentioned in this article appearing in the Sept 5, 2018 NY Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opini...oster.html

It was always my theory that Trump knew whoever he nominated would get unbelievable scrutiny, so he tossed the Kavanaugh grenade out there, hoping it would blow up in Hillary's face.  Then he could nominate who he really wanted.  But he underestimated the Dems taste for corruption, IMO.

(09-07-2018, 10:12 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Hopefully this works.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJK2JveCAbI

Senator Sasse.

Way more eloquent and informational than Spartacus.

(09-07-2018, 10:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 08:50 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

Your article addresses a few different allegations from different people.  I only agree with one of the allegations, that Kavanaugh lied to Congress.  The link it made to Vox was more helpful.

"In sum, do I think future Justice Kavanaugh perjured himself? I don’t. Do I think he’s been less than forthcoming? Absolutely. Do I think he’s been more troublingly less than forthcoming than previous nominees? I do. Do I think we have less access to documents than we have with previous nominees? Yes. But I don’t think that he perjured himself."

The essay I posted invoked obstruction of justice and impeachment, not perjury, and only in the narrow context that "If President Clinton deserved to be impeached for obstructing justice, so does Kavanaugh." So the National Review and Vox are sort of strawmanning the Slate article.
I don't think a fair minded person can deny that Kavanaugh knew memos that he used to promote his goals were obtained illegally and unethically.
Trump could have done better.  I would withdraw him and nominate another person not tied to this episode of stolen memos.

First off, Vox is a far-left rag that is willing to spin anything right of center into a horrific crime. If you are that gullible to believe a Slate article or a Vox commentator then you are clearly an extreme leftist. Why don't you just admit it rather than claiming otherwise?

Kavanaugh has been more forthcoming that any of Obama or Clinton's nominees. The pages of documents requested from him are more than the rest of the Supreme Court nominees combined. In one example in the article I liked to (you should read it) he withheld a statement until he could research the correct answer, and then answered it. That's due diligence, not obfuscation.

And the Clinton impeachment was for perjury as well as obstruction of justice in the Paula Jones case. Not a "high" crime or misdemeanor in my opinion, but an actual crime.

(09-07-2018, 10:27 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 10:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Your article addresses a few different allegations from different people.  I only agree with one of the allegations, that Kavanaugh lied to Congress.  The link it made to Vox was more helpful.

"In sum, do I think future Justice Kavanaugh perjured himself? I don’t. Do I think he’s been less than forthcoming? Absolutely. Do I think he’s been more troublingly less than forthcoming than previous nominees? I do. Do I think we have less access to documents than we have with previous nominees? Yes. But I don’t think that he perjured himself."

The essay I posted invoked obstruction of justice and impeachment, not perjury, and only in the narrow context that "If President Clinton deserved to be impeached for obstructing justice, so does Kavanaugh." So the National Review and Vox are sort of strawmanning the Slate article.
I don't think a fair minded person can deny that Kavanaugh knew memos that he used to promote his goals were obtained illegally and unethically.
Trump could have done better.  I would withdraw him and nominate another person not tied to this episode of stolen memos.

First off, Vox is a far-left rag that is willing to spin anything right of center into a horrific crime. If you are that gullible to believe a Slate article or a Vox commentator then you are clearly an extreme leftist. Why don't you just admit it rather than claiming otherwise?

Kavanaugh has been more forthcoming that any of Obama or Clinton's nominees. The pages of documents requested from him are more than the rest of the Supreme Court nominees combined. In one example in the article I liked to (you should read it) he withheld a statement until he could research the correct answer, and then answered it. That's due diligence, not obfuscation.

And the Clinton impeachment was for perjury as well as obstruction of justice in the Paula Jones case. Not a "high" crime or misdemeanor in my opinion, but an actual crime.

Do you think that Kavanaugh thought it was normal for republican nominees to get draft questions from Democratic party senators?

---

(09-07-2018, 10:11 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 08:56 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]So we have a lefty rag tearing him to shreds and an alt-right circus fighting back.

This, my friends, is what you call a popcorn moment. Heat up a bag and enjoy the show.

If you think National Review is alt-right you are totally clueless. In particular the author, David French, is a virulent Never-Trumpist.

National Review does a lot of good work. I don't think the straw man and guilt by association job you linked to was done insincerely, and most of those allegations from liberals really are ridiculous.

(09-07-2018, 10:09 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-07-2018, 08:50 PM)MalabarJag Wrote: [ -> ]This Article rips the Slate article to shreds.

But Mikey soooo badly wants a conservative nomination! He wouldn't possibly swallow that kind of partisan character assassination, would he?

Gotta save the babies.
Also gotta make Congress actually revise laws, instead of regulators doing it so policy changes last more than one administration, and so the stakes of each presidential election are lower.

(09-07-2018, 09:55 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I saw a response about the confirmation from Ben Sasse.  He nails all the ills about this entire circus.  Should he ever run for president I am all in to the point of quiting my job and campaigning for him.

I, too, like Sasse a lot. But you know he doesn't stand a chance. Too sane and reasonable. The Tea Party / Freedom Caucus types would not allow it.