Ruth Bader Ginsburg praises Brett Kavanaugh as 'very decent' man (1 Viewer)

Liberal*Supreme Court*justice*Ruth Bader Ginsburg*has defended the two most recent additions to America’s highest court as “very decent, very smart” individuals, in spite of ongoing controversy surrounding their nomination.

Click to expand...

Ruth Bader Ginsburg praises Brett Kavanaugh as 'very decent' man | The Independent

Lol less than a year ago the left was screaming how Trump deystroyed the bench and they even talked sbout adding judges to dilute the impact of conservative judges there. Here we have RBG defending his picks.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

trouble13 said:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg praises Brett Kavanaugh as 'very decent' man | The Independent

Lol less than a year ago the left was screaming how Trump deystroyed the bench and they even talked sbout adding judges to dilute the impact of conservative judges there. Here we have RBG defending his picks.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

So she approves of Trump's conservative choice... Amazing!
This tells me that she didn't go along with the manufactured outrage shown by leftists "occupying space" while in congress.

trouble13 said:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg praises Brett Kavanaugh as 'very decent' man | The Independent

Lol less than a year ago the left was screaming how Trump deystroyed the bench and they even talked sbout adding judges to dilute the impact of conservative judges there. Here we have RBG defending his picks.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

You realize that it's likely that she only knows him on a professional level, and that people can act one way at work, and differently in their personal life, right?...

I've lost count of the number of times that I've heard on the news a neighbor of someone who committed a crime say "He was such a nice quiet man"...

beancounter said:

You realize that it's likely that she only knows him on a professional level, and that people can act one way at work, and differently in their personal life, right?...

I've lost count of the number of times that I've heard on the news a neighbor of someone who committed a crime say "He was such a nice quiet man"...

Click to expand...

Oh that's EXACTLY what she was getting at...

:roll:

trouble13 said:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg praises Brett Kavanaugh as 'very decent' man | The Independent

Lol less than a year ago the left was screaming how Trump deystroyed the bench and they even talked sbout adding judges to dilute the impact of conservative judges there. Here we have RBG defending his picks.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

One of her dearest friends was Antonin Scalia. What would make you think she's so partisan that she can't give an honest assessment of a man? Why does this surprise you?

I wonder if Kavanaugh will now say she's a very decent woman.

And why do you have an RIP tag on this thread?

3leftsdoo said:

Oh that's EXACTLY what she was getting at...

:roll:

Click to expand...

Can you read her mind?

Are you implying that she knows him on a personal level?

Do you ever watch the news when they're interviewing neighbors?

tres borrachos said:

One of her dearest friends was Antonin Scalia. What would make you think she's so partisan that she can't give an honest assessment of a man? Why does this surprise you?

I wonder if Kavanaugh will now say she's a very decent woman.

And why do you have an RIP tag on this thread?

Click to expand...

Wishful thinking.

There are no very decent (or very fine) Trumpsters. At least none who actually understand who/what Trump really is.

tres borrachos said:

One of her dearest friends was Antonin Scalia. What would make you think she's so partisan that she can't give an honest assessment of a man? Why does this surprise you?

I wonder if Kavanaugh will now say she's a very decent woman.

And why do you have an RIP tag on this thread?

Click to expand...

Optimist.......:shock:

tres borrachos said:

One of her dearest friends was Antonin Scalia. What would make you think she's so partisan that she can't give an honest assessment of a man? Why does this surprise you?

I wonder if Kavanaugh will now say she's a very decent woman.

And why do you have an RIP tag on this thread?

Click to expand...

I dont know why a RIP tag is on it? I did not add it. Can it be removed?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

beancounter said:

Can you read her mind?

Are you implying that she knows him on a personal level?

Do you ever watch the news when they're interviewing neighbors?

Click to expand...

Can you read her mind?

Are you implying that she does not know him on a personal level?

Do you ever watch the news when they present triggered liberals irrationally melting down?

beancounter said:

You realize that it's likely that she only knows him on a professional level, and that people can act one way at work, and differently in their personal life, right?...

I've lost count of the number of times that I've heard on the news a neighbor of someone who committed a crime say "He was such a nice quiet man"...

Click to expand...

You're talking out your ass.


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

trouble13 said:

I dont know why a RIP tag is on it? I did not add it. Can it be removed?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Not sure. Ask a mod. It's scary.

trouble13 said:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg praises Brett Kavanaugh as 'very decent' man | The Independent

Lol less than a year ago the left was screaming how Trump deystroyed the bench and they even talked sbout adding judges to dilute the impact of conservative judges there. Here we have RBG defending his picks.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Has Mr. Kavanagh fulfilled all your conservative fantasies???? I think not.

It's funny that some of these posters don't realize what their surprise that she would say that says about those posters and the assumptions they regularly make about any judge they think is "liberal" or who was appointed by a Democrat.

If you're surprised she would say that, YOU are the one who behaves in a partisan fashion. It's not some kind of shocker that a 'liberal justice' would praise a conservative colleague or vice versa. Judges don't behave or rule in ways because of their own political lean or that of the person who appointed them. YOU put the label "liberal" or "conservative" on them based on who YOU think those decisions with political implications favor, but the ruling didn't come about because the justice decided to make that side win and worked his/her way backwards from there.

And just like you make those assumptions, some of you apparently assume that if you call a justice "liberal", that means it is somehow important when they praise a colleague.

trouble13 said:

You're talking out your ass.


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Demonstrating your lack of debating skills?

tres borrachos said:

One of her dearest friends was Antonin Scalia. What would make you think she's so partisan that she can't give an honest assessment of a man? Why does this surprise you?

I wonder if Kavanaugh will now say she's a very decent woman.

And why do you have an RIP tag on this thread?

Click to expand...

Seriously, I nearly dropped a brick load in my pants seeing RIP and RBG in the same sentence before fully reading

STUT said:

Seriously, I nearly dropped a brick load in my pants seeing RIP and RBG in the same sentence before fully reading

Click to expand...

As did I.

What this is, is justices trying to protect the judiciary as an institution, by trying to promote the idea of 'independent, honest judges'.

They understand that as the public comes to understand, all too correctly, that the right has created a legal army of indoctrinated people to attack the constitution, and the right-wing citizens are propagandized to think the normal judges want to destroy the country, that it's neither good for the courts nor the country.

That's why even Chief Justice Roberts, as the chief protector of the institution, has said similarly, to counter trump's attacks on judges such as an "Obama judge", that "We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them."

Now, in my opinion, there are 'Obama judges' and Federalist Society judges that are very different; there's a reason the norm is these 5-4 rulings on almost any issue touching on the Republican agenda, with the same 5-4 each time.

But they're trying to protect the institution so the public doesn't lose even more respect for it, make it more vulnerable to the day trump just ignores the courts. As John Paul Stevens dissented in 5-4 Bush v. Gore, "Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law,"

Mr Person said:

It's funny that some of these posters don't realize what their surprise that she would say that says about those posters and the assumptions they regularly make about any judge they think is "liberal" or who was appointed by a Democrat.

If you're surprised she would say that, YOU are the one who behaves in a partisan fashion. It's not some kind of shocker that a 'liberal justice' would praise a conservative colleague or vice versa. Judges don't behave or rule in ways because of their own political lean or that of the person who appointed them. YOU put the label "liberal" or "conservative" on them based on who YOU think those decisions with political implications favor, but the ruling didn't come about because the justice decided to make that side win and worked his/her way backwards from there.

And just like you make those assumptions, some of you apparently assume that if you call a justice "liberal", that means it is somehow important when they praise a colleague.

Click to expand...

Im not surprised that she gets along with the others on the bench. I posted it because it illustrates how phoney the protests by the left were during the confirmation hearings.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

STUT said:

Seriously, I nearly dropped a brick load in my pants seeing RIP and RBG in the same sentence before fully reading

Click to expand...

Im really sorry sbout that it was unintentional

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Mr Person said:

It's funny that some of these posters don't realize what their surprise that she would say that says about those posters and the assumptions they regularly make about any judge they think is "liberal" or who was appointed by a Democrat.

If you're surprised she would say that, YOU are the one who behaves in a partisan fashion. It's not some kind of shocker that a 'liberal justice' would praise a conservative colleague or vice versa. Judges don't behave or rule in ways because of their own political lean or that of the person who appointed them. YOU put the label "liberal" or "conservative" on them based on who YOU think those decisions with political implications favor, but the ruling didn't come about because the justice decided to make that side win and worked his/her way backwards from there.

And just like you make those assumptions, some of you apparently assume that if you call a justice "liberal", that means it is somehow important when they praise a colleague.

Click to expand...

trouble13 said:

Im not surprised that she gets along with the others on the bench. I posted it because it illustrates how phoney the protests by the left were during the confirmation hearings.

Click to expand...

Psssst: my post was an attack on the thinking in the bolded.

To the extent someone protested, it was because they found his accuser credible and felt 40 years should not excuse what they believed occurred. (And I don't want to get into it again, but do bear in mind that you can be convicted of rape based solely on the alleged victim's testimony....so there's no inherent unfairness in not getting a top job because of one witness's testimony). The fact that a justice you deem liberal complimented Kavanaugh-now does not in any way prove or disprove that the witness was lying or mistaken about what Kavanaugh-then did to her. One has nothing to do with the other.

But you assume it does.

Why? Because of a partisan approach to the matter.

Mr Person said:

Psssst: my post was an attack on the thinking in the bolded.

To the extent someone protested, it was because they found his accuser credible and felt 40 years should not excuse what they believed occurred. (And I don't want to get into it again, but do bear in mind that you can be convicted of rape based solely on the alleged victim's testimony....so there's no inherent unfairness in not getting a top job because of one witness's testimony). The fact that a justice you deem liberal complimented Kavanaugh-now does not in any way prove or disprove that the witness was lying or mistaken about what Kavanaugh-then did to her. One has nothing to do with the other.

But you assume it does.

Why? Because of a partisan approach to the matter.

Click to expand...

Ok if they believed her and feel that way than why have the protests stopped?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

trouble13 said:

Ok if they believed her and feel that way than why have the protests stopped?

Click to expand...

You don't seem to be following this beyond being able to identify the general subjects. I'll try to be patient but no guarantees, though liberal bolded capslock will be applied to ease translation:

The protests were to prevent him from being confirmed to the Supreme Court. The protests stopped BECAUSE HE'S ON THE DAMNED SUPREME COURT ALREADY.

The protests have stopped because your partisan assumptions about the motivation of the protesters were WRONG.




You know what "moot" means, right?