Travesty unfolding in Kavanaugh Hearing

[dawg80]

Goosey...

it appears Kavanaugh will be confirmed. It's looking that way. So, let's say he is, what exactly is it about his judicial record that you don't like? What issue...Roe? 2nd Amendment? the death penalty? Ummm….that pretty much covers most of what you libs care about. But feel free to toss in another issue, or two.

Judicial records, opinions, are outside the scope of my area(s) of expertise. So, I am relying on what others, who might know, think. Believe it or not, I value your opinion, assessment. I know I give you a hard time on this board, but that's only because I enjoy doing that. Has nothing to do with what I really think about you or your knowledge.

Okay, it appears that Kavanaugh has been very consistent in applying the law and precedent when he rules on a case. I haven't seen, from either side, any real angst about his having ruled based strictly on what might appear to be his personal viewpoint on an issue. If he has, and it was something that riled up libs, there has not been anything put out there about it. In my opinion, libs are anti-Kavanaugh not because of what he has done, on the bench, but on what he hasn't and won't....legislate from the bench.

If you can, set aside the outside of the courtroom stuff and focus on his judicial track record. Thanks.

[dawg80]

Oh, one addendum, just saw a mention on FOX...yeah, I know....there might be some concern by the illegal immigration forces that Kavanaugh would not rule in their favor should some case on that issue reach the SC. I have seen nothing, heard nothing on how Kavanaugh might rule on immigration, either way.

[Guisslapp]

I am concerned he will erode trust in the institution. Don’t care about how he rules. Most of just want judges to follow precedent.

[dawg80]

I am concerned he will erode trust in the institution. Don’t care about how he rules. Most of just want judges to follow precedent.

In other words, you have no objection to his being seated on the SC. If indeed you really mean what you posted, then you should be thumbs up.

[Guisslapp]

In other words, you have no objection to his being seated on the SC. If indeed you really mean what you posted, then you should be thumbs up.

I am not concerned with how he will rule.

[DONW]

Former SC Justice Stevens withdraws his support after Thursday’s debacle.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/jo...-confirmation/

The article said his court rulings were more liberal than conservative. " His rulings overall tended to be more liberal than conservative, particularly later in his term." We already knew that liberals hate Kavanaugh.

[DONW]

What I though. Nothing.

Not at all. What I'm saying is that just about everything she said was a lie. She over did all the personalities she tried to emulate. That whole thing was a farce including her 2 lawyers. I'm surprised they didn't have her better prepared. It was really obvious she was lying.

[Guisslapp]

Not at all. What I'm saying is that just about everything she said was a lie. She over did all the personalities she tried to emulate. That whole thing was a farce including her 2 lawyers. I'm surprised they didn't have her better prepared. It was really obvious she was lying.

In what way was the lie obvious? How could you tell, specifically?

[Guisslapp]

The article said his court rulings were more liberal than conservative. " His rulings overall tended to be more liberal than conservative, particularly later in his term." We already knew that liberals hate Kavanaugh. He got old and senile and turned into a liberal.

Most judges rule more liberally over time. But he supported a Kavanaugh’s nomination originally.

[SicemDawgz]

I read today where her lawyers may be in hot water for not disclosing that she could have been interviewed in private. They intentionally withheld that information from her.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

In other words, you have no objection to his being seated on the SC. If indeed you really mean what you posted, then you should be thumbs up.

I am not concerned with how he will rule.

So you didn't like Kavanaugh strictly due to Trump nominating him then correct?

[Guisslapp]

So you didn't like Kavanaugh strictly due to Trump nominating him then correct?

I don’t like him because of how he behaved at the hearing on Thursday and how he misrepresented himself on FoxNews and the hearing. The Ford allegations are troubling as well.

[dawg80]

I don’t like him because of how he behaved at the hearing on Thursday and how he misrepresented himself on FoxNews and the hearing. The Ford allegations are troubling as well.

You have been anti-Kavanaugh since before the Ford allegations were even known.

[Guisslapp]

You have been anti-Kavanaugh since before the Ford allegations were even known.

What did I say?

[dawg80]

Memory lapses...

There's a Facebook post going around claiming that Ruth Ginsberg has said she would resign if Kavanaugh is confirmed. Something to the effect that she refuses to be in the same room "as that man." Oh, if only this was true! Unfortunately, it's nothing but wishful thinking by good Americans.

I do think Ruthie should retire.