Trump selects Brett Kavanaugh for Supreme Court

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
Are you saying Congress acts on their responsibilities of checks and balances and not politically now!!??
Of course, but impeaching the SCOTUS because of their constitional understanding of abortion? Especially if it were overturned it would simply become a state issue.

Seriously?

We know liberals are out there, but are you really saying they are that unhinged?

It's happened one other time, so I suppose it could again.... It was 214 years ago though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase

Justice Samual Chase was impeached by the House of Representatives (Chase, March 1804), but was acquitted in the Senate (March 1805).
 
Last edited:

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,294
2,177
1,743
So Cal
All candidates have been approved of by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation as well. If they are so homogeneous why do you think it's coincidence that Trump chose this one over the others? I have my opinion.
why in the would would I try to think what Trump was thinking.... I'm no clairvoyant.

If there was any validity to your claim, then Trump would have chosen Kavanaugh as his first pick (instead of Gorsich), wouldn't he? Trump had no way of knowing that he would get a 2nd pick this quickly, and even if you subscribe to the conspiracy theory between Trump and Kennedy, why would he have waited until it is very clear that there is no collusion (as if that were even a crime), and the Mueller investigation now simply limping along so that Mueller can feed off the teat of the American taxpayer to enrich himself?

Your wild allegation makes no sense when considered in the back drop of his first choice for the court (when he could also have done what you are alleging) and in the ever lessening fog of Mueller's Salem witch hunt producing anything remotely close to damaging to Trump.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,294
2,177
1,743
So Cal
Congratulations then! I on the other hand have witnessed many a Christian friend and relative make a Faulstian bargain and ignore things they would have punished their children for from this President just to obtain these Supreme Court judges whilst knowing full well that you can not mandate morality or eliminate the separation of church and state in order to create a Christian Taliban on everyone that doesn't believe EXACTLY like the majority.
As I spent my career in public schools I've probably had to adapt my attitudes more than most in order to accommodate my clientele. I could not really push my beliefs on others by law, and that's not a bad thing. Students are a captive audience .
If you don't have a personal relationship with Christ are you saved? Group think and pressured morality often lead to rebellion not compliance. The preachers kids are too often the wildest. Forced compliance to majority rule doesn't sound like the type of country I've grown accustomed to. You may be pleased with this abrupt change but it worries the hell out of me. What's next? Can't buy or sell without the mark of the beast? All hail Trump! MAGA lol kinda
Kavanaough is a staunch supporter of religious protection as provided in the Constitution - you should love this guy as a Supreme Being.

as for his statement 2 decades ago (before he was an Appeals Court Judge), his view is the prevailing view regarding a sitting President, and is also the position of the DOJ.

I think you're trying to hang a red herring around this guys neck out of hatred for Trump.

"Kavanaugh's stance—or his stance at that time— is not an unusual or outlandish one. In fact, it's the official position of the Justice Department, formally articulated in a 1973 opinion under President Richard Nixon and reaffirmed in 2000 under President Bill Clinton."

what exactly is your complaint about this nomination for SCOTUS?
 
Sep 13, 2013
4,493
1,140
243
Left field
why in the would would I try to think what Trump was thinking.... I'm no clairvoyant.

If there was any validity to your claim, then Trump would have chosen Kavanaugh as his first pick (instead of Gorsich), wouldn't he? Trump had no way of knowing that he would get a 2nd pick this quickly, and even if you subscribe to the conspiracy theory between Trump and Kennedy, why would he have waited until it is very clear that there is no collusion (as if that were even a crime), and the Mueller investigation now simply limping along so that Mueller can feed off the teat of the American taxpayer to enrich himself?

Your wild allegation makes no sense when considered in the back drop of his first choice for the court (when he could also have done what you are alleging) and in the ever lessening fog of Mueller's Salem witch hunt producing anything remotely close to damaging to Trump.
Don't know if there was a crime or not, We do know though that the AG was held in contempt of Congress for not turning over documents. You know, the most transparent administration eveeeeerrr!!!!
Only recently has a small minority of Republicans started to attack Mueller. This man has helped keep this country safe his entire career, hardly enriching himself on the government test. That absolutely would describe our current president. Witch hunt is just as wild a claim. 21 indicted and counting.
 
Sep 13, 2013
4,493
1,140
243
Left field
Kavanaough is a staunch supporter of religious protection as provided in the Constitution - you should love this guy as a Supreme Being.

as for his statement 2 decades ago (before he was an Appeals Court Judge), his view is the prevailing view regarding a sitting President, and is also the position of the DOJ.

I think you're trying to hang a red herring around this guys neck out of hatred for Trump.

"Kavanaugh's stance—or his stance at that time— is not an unusual or outlandish one. In fact, it's the official position of the Justice Department, formally articulated in a 1973 opinion under President Richard Nixon and reaffirmed in 2000 under President Bill Clinton."

what exactly is your complaint about this nomination for SCOTUS?
Other than what I've listed before, I'd say the way he toadies up to his magnificent awesome wonderful personage of Donald Trump President of our kind of people and I'll be loyal and true to you if you end up in my court your excellency. Lol
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
Only recently has a small minority of Republicans started to attack Mueller. This man has helped keep this country safe his entire career, hardly enriching himself on the government test. That absolutely would describe our current president. Witch hunt is just as wild a claim. 21 indicted and counting.
What does that have to do with the AG under Obama withholding documents under subpeona from Congress? Are you ok with such tactics from a White House Administration? Yes or No?
 
Sep 13, 2013
4,493
1,140
243
Left field
What does that have to do with the AG under Obama withholding documents under subpeona from Congress? Are you ok with such tactics from a White House Administration? Yes or No?
Do you have a nice singing voice? If so, you need to release a new album and name it Living in the Past.
 
Sep 6, 2012
1,462
742
743
Edmond
Do you have a nice singing voice? If so, you need to release a new album and name it Living in the Past.
I think that the issue that we perceive is there are a different set of rules for different presidents. Sure there were people bitching and moaning when BO did his deeds. I am sure there were as many people on the right that disagreed with him. The major difference is that MSM didn't put a camera on it, like they do with trump. Liberal activists are trying to rule the country through the courts, against everything the current admin wants to do. Right, wrong or indifferent. Also without civil discourse. I recently got back from Jamaica, and met quite a few people from New York and New Jersey. I would say, we were from the Oklahoma. Then the political discussion would start. What is funny is we had discussions and their biggest issue was the business tax breaks. I explained my side a small business owner and they seemed to understand it from my side.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
Do you have a nice singing voice? If so, you need to release a new album and name it Living in the Past.
I only pointed out the only time in US History the AG (the only white house cabinet member for that matter) was held in contempt of Congress. Then I simply asked if you were ok with a White House doing that.

Are you ok with the Trump White House and AG Sessions withholding documents from Congress which are under a subpoena? Yes or No.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
Do you have a nice singing voice? If so, you need to release a new album and name it Living in the Past.
Whats bothersome about your post is that the case involved the US government perhaps illegally supplying guns to drug cartels in Mexico that resulted in the death of American Citizens and even children in Mexico. I simply can't understand why you don't want to know the truth about that.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,294
2,177
1,743
So Cal
Other than what I've listed before, I'd say the way he toadies up to his magnificent awesome wonderful personage of Donald Trump President of our kind of people and I'll be loyal and true to you if you end up in my court your excellency. Lol
I'm not even going to attempt a reply to such childishness. Pathetic bigotry on your part.

Do you have anything FACTUAL to discuss on the topic?
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,294
2,177
1,743
So Cal
Only recently has a small minority of Republicans started to attack Mueller. This man has helped keep this country safe his entire career, hardly enriching himself on the government test. That absolutely would describe our current president. Witch hunt is just as wild a claim. 21 indicted and counting.
Practically none of your statement is actually true, you're simply listing left-wing talking points that are not based in fact, or that are totally irrelevant to the topic (like 21 indicted alternative fact nonsense)

I don't know what "recent small minority of Republicans" that your referring too (Congress?), but personally I have been exposing Mueller the fraud since he was appointed in such a dishonest and practically illegal manner (conflict of interest). Almost all "republicans" that I care to listen too have exposed Mueller since day 1.

The last time Mueller was involved with something like this (Sarin powder or some such) he made a complete fool of himself, chased the wrong "suspects" for YEARS, and cost the government millions of dollars in "settlements" for imprisoning the wrong person.

And then there is the innocent Martha Stewart that he threw in jail for allegedly lying to him about something that was not even a crime. Stewart was convicted by Mueller for nothing more than what Mueller is ruining General Flynn's life over - lying to the FBI (when Comey himself said he did not consider Flynn to be lying, and actually DROPPED THE ISSUE - Muller picked it back up (the same "lie" Comey cleared Flynn of) simply for political reasons.

I'll ask again, what is your complaint with the nomination of Kavanaugh (besides that you hate Trump, and are ignorant about Mueller -- as if either of those have anything to do with the SCOTUS nomination.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,636
17,917
1,743
Democrats playing both sides of the same issue as if fits their activists agenda. The truth doesn't matter.

The troubling part is how someone can take both sides of the issue and then claim they were right both times.