╌>

Brett Kavanaugh Gonna Get Yelled At In Restaurants

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  johnrussell  •  8 years ago  •  52 comments

Brett Kavanaugh Gonna Get Yelled At In Restaurants

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



...To send you off on your weekend, we've rounded up some extra special stories about why Brett Kavanaugh is a horrible garbage monster.

In The Nation, Joan Walsh summarized how Democrats started the hearings off by pissing all over the rug Chuck Grassley was using to hide hundreds of thousands of pages of emails, articles, and memos Kavanaugh had written and received over the years. Walsh understands the anger progressives felt when Democrats didn't walk out, but had that happened we never would have gotten those screen grabs of Kavanaugh twisting his face as protesters called him a racist lady killer.

Kavanaugh's time in the Bush 43 White House meant that he participated in a whole host of shady things, and then later lied about them. Literally. In 2006, as Lisa Graves writes in Slate, Kavanaugh flat out lied under oath during his hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee about receiving stolen memos -- Graves's, in fact. Graves argues that Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court shouldn't just be struck down, but that we should #IMPEACH.

On Wednesday the New York Times published an op-ed from Sean Wilentz about how Kavanaugh was obsessed with the death of Vince Foster. Even though Foster's death was ruled a suicide by every prior investigation, Kavanaugh felt it necessary to pick apart every carpet fiber on Foster's corpse, going so far as to even hunt for leftover hair follicles from Foster's teenage daughter alongside lifelong conservative conspiracy theorists Chris Ruddy, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, and Reed Irvine. Kavanaugh's defenders have specifically noted his attention to detail, but they can't explain why Republicans in the 1990s seemed so obsessed with blood and cum stains....

980x.gif


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    8 years ago
On Wednesday the New York Times published an op-ed from Sean Wilentz about how Kavanaugh was obsessed with the death of Vince Foster. Even though Foster's death was ruled a suicide by every prior investigation, Kavanaugh felt it necessary to pick apart every carpet fiber on Foster's corpse, going so far as to even hunt for leftover hair follicles from Foster's teenage daughter alongside lifelong conservative conspiracy theorists Chris Ruddy, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, and Reed Irvine.
 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2  Sean Treacy    8 years ago

After watching the Democrats shitshow of a confirmation hearing, it's amazing liberals ever complain about Trump.

It's endorsing things like this "Brett Kavanaugh Gonna Get Yelled At In Restaurants" that make Trump possible, because it makes him look like an adult compared to the loony tune juveniles of the Democrat party.

Congrats on making Trump's reelection possible.

Jonah Goldberg nailed it this morning:

"Trump’s greatest vulnerability in 2020 stems from the fact that he never stopped being a chaos agent. Many current and formerly Republican-leaning voters hate all the drama that sustains the GOP base and radicalizes the liberal base. These voters — particularly college-educated white women — may like many of Trump’s policies and appointments, but they feel like they’re overdosing on crazy pills or trying to elude a monkey that escaped from a cocaine study. The more Democrats act like would-be Spartacuses, the more the craziness on both sides of the equation cancel each other out. That leaves a (presumably good) economy and the devil they know in the White House as a potentially preferable option to the devils promising “socialism” and a left-wing culture-war agenda."

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    8 years ago

Brett Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court. He is an obvious political partisan. As I said in another article he says he will follow precedent, and he will scour every scrap of paper he can find to uncover precedents that affirm his prejudgements that the conservative side of arguments made to the court are the correct ones. The instance in the hearing of him telling one of the senators about how he kept looking for a precedent (to deny workers legal standing) after the rest of the judges on the court had been satisfied with a precedent that granted them standing , tells me all I need to know about Kavanaugh.  Plus there were times in the questioning where he obviously hid the truth from the senators. 

We need to have moderate judges on the Supreme Court, not people like him. All future nominees starting with this one, should be moderates. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    8 years ago

Brett Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court

Kavanaugh might have been the nominee of any Republican from McCain to Huntsman to Jeb Bush  if they were President. He's moderation personified, which is why Democrats couldn't argue against his long record as a Judge.  

He is an obvious political partisan

So you'd agree Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburg should be off the Court as well. 

 All future nominees starting with this one, should be moderates.

Kavanaugh, like Roberts, is what a moderate justice looks like.  A radical sounds like Judtice Kennedy, who relied on vacous rhetoric to just forcing his own principles on the Constitution. As Scalia said about Kennedy:

"If, even as the price to be paid for a fifth vote, I ever joined an opinion for the Court that began: ‘The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity,’ I would hide my head in a bag. The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.1    8 years ago

He is an obvious political partisan, but I would expect no other reply from you. 

Workers and the environment and minority rights are in trouble when this corporate tool gets on the SC. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    8 years ago
Workers and the environment and minority rights are in trouble when this corporate tool gets on the SC

Win elections. Write Laws that support your policies rather than relying on 5 un-elected judges to act as a super legislature and enforce the policies you can't get Democratically enacted. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.4  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.3    8 years ago

He wanted to use a conspiracy theory to embarrass a Democratic leader. He doesn't belong on the Supreme Court. 

 
 
 
Cerenkov
Professor Silent
2.1.5  Cerenkov  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.4    8 years ago

He is one of the most qualified candidates in history. Only political partisans think otherwise. I'll accept the ABA's opinion over a crazed mob of would-be Spartacuses.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
2.1.6  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    8 years ago

By your reasoning, it seems you have just ruled anyone who is not a progressive leftist leaning liberal.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Participates
4  Raven Wing     8 years ago

Personally, I find attacking people while dining in restaurants, or even fast food operations, totally juvenile and uncalled for. No matter who they are, or what their personal affiliations, beliefs, political views or associations, they should not be attacked by others while in restaurants or fat food operations. 

In my personal OPINION, it does not shame the person being attacked as much as the person doing the attacking. 

Just my own OPINION.

 
 
 
dave-2693993
Junior Silent
4.2  dave-2693993  replied to  Raven Wing @4    8 years ago

I agree with your opinion.

 
 
 
Silent_Hysteria
Freshman Silent
5  Silent_Hysteria    8 years ago

Encouraging that will not end well.  If it becomes widely accepted you will see both sides start doing it.  Then bystanders will get involved.  

I really feel where are headed for some dark times. It's going to be targeted attacks at political rallies to start.  If the economy tanks and people have less to lose you will see it expand.  Especially wants laws get passed that one side feels is unconstitutional.

 
 
 
Rmando
Sophomore Silent
6  Rmando    8 years ago

Getting yelled at in a restaurant is a small price to pay to stop the Constitution from being ripped to shreds. At any rate I'm sure all SCOTUS members have some sort of federal protection. Anybody trying to start something is liable to get a govt issued leather shoe suppository.

 
 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
Sophomore Quiet
6.1  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  Rmando @6    8 years ago

Read this,

 
 
 
Rmando
Sophomore Silent
6.1.1  Rmando  replied to  Galen Marvin Ross @6.1    8 years ago

Read it. I knew somebody was tasked with guarding judges, just wasn't sure if it was the Secret Service or not. That link doesn't make it clear if SCOTUS members automatically get US Marshall service or if they have to have a credible threat first.

 
 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
Sophomore Quiet
6.1.2  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  Rmando @6.1.1    8 years ago
That link doesn't make it clear if SCOTUS members automatically get US Marshall service or if they have to have a credible threat first.

I think its a credible threat first, what made me think of this was a story from the old west in San Francisco about a judge who had requested protection and, had a marshal in his courtroom, the marshal shot a defendant who had tried to attack the judge, it seems the service can shoot first and, ask questions later when it comes to protection like that.

 
 
 
Rmando
Sophomore Silent
6.1.3  Rmando  replied to  Galen Marvin Ross @6.1.2    8 years ago

Interesting. Thanks for the link.

 
 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
Sophomore Quiet
6.1.4  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  Rmando @6.1.3    8 years ago

Anytime.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
6.2  MrFrost  replied to  Rmando @6    8 years ago
Getting yelled at in a restaurant is a small price to pay to stop the Constitution from being ripped to shreds.

Do you think he will stop trump from attacking the 1st amendment on a daily basis? 

 
 
 
Galen Marvin Ross
Sophomore Quiet
6.2.1  Galen Marvin Ross  replied to  MrFrost @6.2    8 years ago
Do you think he will stop trump from attacking the 1st amendment on a daily basis?

laughing dude

 
 
 
Rmando
Sophomore Silent
6.2.2  Rmando  replied to  MrFrost @6.2    8 years ago

Trump spouting off about the press or anonymous editorials is not "attacking" the First Amendment. Until he orders newspapers shut down or reporters jailed- which he has no authority to do- then freedom of speech will be fine. When every stand up comedian, late nite host, liberal pundit, Hollywood actor, overpaid athlete and ex president is attacking him on a regular basis it's pretty hard to argue there is no freedom of speech.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
7  MrFrost    8 years ago

 
 
 
Rmando
Sophomore Silent
7.1  Rmando  replied to  MrFrost @7    8 years ago

Well, if it's on Slate then it must be true... /sarc

 
 

Who is online


Tacos!


73 visitors