Brett Kavanaugh Is Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee: Live Updates

[Jack Hays]

It is all well documented.
Getting back to the thread topic, it is also understood that he surrounds himself with sycophants. Kavanaugh demonstrated that trait in his speech.

It is not sycophancy for a SCOTUS nominee to offer gracious remarks about the POTUS who nominated him. It is merely courtesy and social grace.

 

[Cassandra]

It is not sycophancy for a SCOTUS nominee to offer gracious remarks about the POTUS who nominated him. It is merely courtesy and social grace.

I listened to his speech. Kavanaugh could have thanked Trump without the hyperbole , really lying. He did not have to say, “No president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination.”

Most importantly, he is on record for saying that Congress should pass legislation providing the P.O.T.U.S. immunity from prosecution -even though he was Ken Starr's deputy who vigorously went after Clinton. His opinions appear to change depending on the political winds.

 

[Jack Hays]

I listened to his speech. Kavanaugh could have thanked Trump without the hyperbole , really lying. He did not have to say, “No president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination.”

Most importantly, he is on record for saying that Congress should pass legislation providing the P.O.T.U.S. immunity from prosecution -even though he was Ken Starr's deputy who vigorously went after Clinton. His opinions appear to change depending on the political winds.

We'll have to disagree about his Trump remarks. In fact there's a case to be made that Trump has consulted more widely. His SCOTUS search apparatus was active even before he was inaugurated.

Kavanaugh's position on POTUS prosecution is right in line with his originalist views. In the absence of legislation during the Clinton years he argued for prosecution. Now he points out (consistently) that there's no bar to prosecution but there could be a legislative remedy.

 

[Cassandra]

Kavanaugh's position on POTUS prosecution is right in line with his originalist views. In the absence of legislation during the Clinton years he argued for prosecution. Now he points out (consistently) that there's no bar to prosecution but there could be a legislative remedy.

Yes, true. And we will probably find out if he is consistent in his opinions absent legislative action. So far, there are many reasons for people to question the trope that the Repub dominated S.C. is a non partisan institution that adheres to some sort of "originalism". Like every other branch of gov't since Trump became P.O.T.U.S., the S.C. has become a much more partisan and the antipathy between members is quite apparent. The S.C. search "apparatus" of which you speak is largely funded by the Koch Bros. That alone should tell you something about their biases.

 

[Plus Ultra]

A modest nominee:

The vetting of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is just beginning, but his public financial disclosures make one thing clear: He's not as wealthy as many already on the high court.

Public disclosure forms for 2017 show that the federal judge would come to the nation's highest court with only two investments, including a bank account, together worth a maximum of $65,000, along with the balance on a loan of $15,000 or less.

Separate from the disclosure forms, the White House said that between Kavanaugh's retirement account balance of $400,000 to $500,000, and the equity in his home in Chevy Chase, Maryland, he has about an additional million dollars in wealth.

The annual salary in 2018 for a circuit court judge is $220,600, according to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/gov...cle_617dfb42-94df-57af-b3fe-7a1f54c0ac6a.html

Hard to find any basis for criticism here.

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes, true. And we will probably find out if he is consistent in his opinions absent legislative action. So far, there are many reasons for people to question the trope that the Repub dominated S.C. is a non partisan institution that adheres to some sort of "originalism". Like every other branch of gov't since Trump became P.O.T.U.S., the S.C. has become a much more partisan and the antipathy between members is quite apparent. The S.C. search "apparatus" of which you speak is largely funded by the Koch Bros. That alone should tell you something about their biases.

The trend toward partisanship has been building for decades, as liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats both became virtually extinct.
I don't see any unusually great antipathy among the SCOTUS justices, but I don't have any special access either.
The Federalist Society is the engine of Republican judiciary selections.

 

[Cassandra]

The trend toward partisanship has been building for decades, as liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats both became virtually extinct.
I don't see any unusually great antipathy among the SCOTUS justices, but I don't have any special access either.
The Federalist Society is the engine of Republican judiciary selections.

None of these divisions bode well for citizen confidence in the political process.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/27/politics/supreme-court-prepares-for-right-turn/index.html

"Washington (CNN)As the White House and Congress descend deeper into turmoil, the US Supreme Court is showing signs of becoming as politically fractured as the rest of Washington."

Historic delays in issuing decisions and at-times sharp jabs between justices on the bench also point to disharmony at a time when the Supreme Court could play a larger role in American life. The Trump administration faces numerous lawsuits over its policies, including new challenges based on the administration's announcement that the Census will include a question about individual's citizenship.
A looming question since January 2017 has been whether the justices would become a check on Trump, who has flouted legal norms, criticized federal judges, and revealed disdain for the rule of law.

In the Supreme Court dispute over immigrants denied bail, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer took the unusual step late last month of reading a lengthy and impassioned dissenting statement from the bench, warning of a new breach of constitutional due process. Such dramatic oral dissents typically occur later in the session, when tensions rise as the court faces a late June deadline and highly anticipated cases with national implications...."

Supreme Court prepares for right turn
By Joan Biskupic, CNN Legal Analyst and Supreme Court Biographer

 

[Jack Hays]

None of these divisions bode well for citizen confidence in the political process.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/27/politics/supreme-court-prepares-for-right-turn/index.html

"Washington (CNN)As the White House and Congress descend deeper into turmoil, the US Supreme Court is showing signs of becoming as politically fractured as the rest of Washington."

Historic delays in issuing decisions and at-times sharp jabs between justices on the bench also point to disharmony at a time when the Supreme Court could play a larger role in American life. The Trump administration faces numerous lawsuits over its policies, including new challenges based on the administration's announcement that the Census will include a question about individual's citizenship.
A looming question since January 2017 has been whether the justices would become a check on Trump, who has flouted legal norms, criticized federal judges, and revealed disdain for the rule of law.

In the Supreme Court dispute over immigrants denied bail, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer took the unusual step late last month of reading a lengthy and impassioned dissenting statement from the bench, warning of a new breach of constitutional due process. Such dramatic oral dissents typically occur later in the session, when tensions rise as the court faces a late June deadline and highly anticipated cases with national implications...."

Supreme Court prepares for right turn
By Joan Biskupic, CNN Legal Analyst and Supreme Court Biographer

Scalia used to read impassioned dissents from time to time.

 

[Plus Ultra]

Confirmation vote on mid-term’s eve?

Senate Democrats, led by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), are demanding documents, perhaps up to one million pages of them, spanning Kavanaugh’s career in the George W. Bush White House as he comes up for Senate consideration. Breitbart News’s Senior Legal Editor Ken Klukowski opined Friday that Schumer’s move was “merely an obstructionist tactic to push his confirmation into 2019 to harm Republicans in the midterms, and hoping to retake Senate control so they can keep the Supreme Court seat open until 2021, after the next presidential election.”

According to Politico, McConnell told Capitol Hill Republicans at meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday if the left persisted in these requests, he would delay the vote on Kavanaugh until late October or November, forcing vulnerable red state Democrats to vote up or down on Kavanaugh just before voters go to the polls. McConnell, by the same reports, reiterated his preference for a vote before the Senate’s October recess, which would allow Kavanaugh to take his seat before the opening of the Supreme Court’s main 2018-2019 session.

McConnell’s delaying the vote through October may also deprive the same incumbent Democrats of their October recess and the ability to campaign full-time in the leadup to the election. https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover...uff-threatens-election-eve-vote-on-kavanaugh/

Interesting problem. Maybe Democrats need to postpone this a bit more (on account of those millions of pages they need to review), but what happens if they don’t gain a majority in the Senate?

 

[Plus Ultra]

Seeking 'dirt' on his wife!

The New York Times and Associated Press both filed requests under the Maryland Public Information Act (PIA) seeking e-mails that Ashley Kavanaugh, the wife of President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, sent as town manager of The Village of Chevy Chase Section 5, according to documents obtained by America Rising Squared (AR2) and shared exclusively with the NTK Network.

The two news organizations took different approaches to obtain the e-mails. According to the documents, the AP made a sweeping request for “all emails sent or received” by Ashley Kavanaugh’s Village of Chevy Chase email address.

By contrast, The New York Times is currently requesting that The Village of Chevy Chase Section 5 hand over “any emails to or from Ms. Kavanaugh that contain any of the keywords or terms listed below.”

And what a list it is, including words like “liberal,” “abortion,” “gay,” and “federalist,” while also explicitly asking for e-mails containing the names of certain individuals.

This list of terms that The New York Times requested reads like it was constructed in order to manufacture a hit piece on the wife of Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. These documents appear to show that The New York Times is most interested in echoing liberal attack lines in the battle over Judge Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination, going so far as to target the nominee’s wife. https://ntknetwork.com/revealed-nyt...oking-for-abortion-gun-gay-federalist-emails/

Not fake, they reproduce the NYT request. I think its outrageous, the New York Times and Associated Press trying to find dirt on Judge Kavanaugh's wife to prevent his selection for the Supreme Court.

 

[Plus Ultra]

Nicely timed:

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's Senate confirmation hearings will start on Sept. 4 and last between three and four days, Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) announced on Friday.

That scheduling tees up the GOP to meet its goal of getting President Donald Trump's pick seated on the high court by the time its term begins in early October, barring unforeseen obstacles or a breakthrough by Democrats who are pushing to derail Kavanaugh's confirmation. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/10/kavanaugh-confirmation-hearings-set-for-sept-4-773344

Confirmation will give conservatives a nice boost before the midterms, plus it will be fun to watch the lefties rending their garments and gnashing their teeth.

 

[Fiddytree]

Nicely timed:

Confirmation will give conservatives a nice boost before the midterms, plus it will be fun to watch the lefties rending their garments and gnashing their teeth.

Frankly I take the opposite approach. If you confirm Kavanaugh before the mid-terms, you don't give Republicans a reason to turn out for down-ballot contests. They get their court pick, thereby solidifying a majority.

If you delay it or somehow shoot Kavanaugh down, guess what goes on the ballot and guess which side actually votes specifically for court picks?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[Plus Ultra]

I'm not sure Kavanaugh's confirmation will keep conservatives at home on midterm election day, I think this would make them feel even more satisfied with Trump's record keeping campaign promises.

It Kavanaugh is not confirmed there probably will only be 8 Justices on the Supreme Court until Trump is ousted.

 

[Fiddytree]

I'm not sure Kavanaugh's confirmation will keep conservatives at home on midterm election day, I think this would make them feel even more satisfied with Trump's record keeping campaign promises.

It Kavanaugh is not confirmed there probably will only be 8 Justices on the Supreme Court until Trump is ousted.

They would be satisfied with Trump, but after Kavanaugh, are the courts in jeopardy? No. Is Trump on the ballot? No. Is Trump's Presidency seriously at risk? Not a chance with the Senate even remotely at an even split.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[Plus Ultra]

They would be satisfied with Trump, but after Kavanaugh, are the courts in jeopardy? No. Is Trump on the ballot? No. Is Trump's Presidency seriously at risk? Not a chance with the Senate even remotely at an even split.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

If this is a "referendum" on Trump and conservatives are relieved at the abrogation of Obamacare's "individual mandate", pleased over Gorsuch's installation, overjoyed over the tax cuts, 4.1% growth in GDP, low unemployment and 2.7% wage growth, Kavanaugh's confirmation is icing on the cake, why wouldn't they go out to the ballot box and give him a strong pat in the back?

Wouldn't conservatives want him to get that wall done?

 

[Plus Ultra]

Searched, but didn't find any 'dirt' on his wife:

In the case of Mr. Kavanaugh, The Times requested records under Maryland’s public records law from Chevy Chase Section 5, where the nominee’s wife, Ashley, serves as town manager.’’

We sought email records involving Judge Kavanaugh and communications that referenced hot-button topics. We believed that the records, if they existed, could provide a unique and personalized view into the nominee. We worked with the town to minimize the time and cost involved in responding to our request. (The Associated Press submitted its own request, and The Times and others have filed separate requests with the National Archives pertaining to Mr. Kavanaugh.)

Ultimately, our request yielded 85 pages of emails, none of which provided any substantive insights into Mr. Kavanaugh’s judicial philosophy. Instead, the records were largely what you would expect from a town manager’s email account —mundane dispatches about town business, from snow removals to local newsletters. Not surprisingly, a number of people, neighbors and strangers alike, sent Ashley Kavanaugh congratulations on her husband’s nomination. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/10/reader-center/bett-kavanaugh-wife-foia-request.html