quote:

Originally posted by Ackks:
I don't know how people can watch this crap show and still vote for Democrats in November.

I highly doubt they are watching it live. If they are following it at all it is through the un-social media feeds of their leftist masters. Much easier to wait and be told what to think and say than to actually have to come to those decisions yourself.

Children. Everyone of them is a child that thinks because 51% of the dipshits in their state voted for them makes them special.

https://www.dailywire.com/news...umps-law-ben-shapiro

On Wednesday, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) attempted to grab the 2020 Democratic presidential limelight by launching into an attack on Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s latest pick for the Supreme Court. She essentially accused Kavanaugh of stonewalling on whether he had spoken with President Trump’s law firm about the Robert Mueller investigation.

Kavanaugh correctly said he didn’t know what she was talking about, and also said he didn’t know every lawyer at Kasowitz Benson Torres – a law firm with nearly 300 attorneys

That didn’t stop Harris, who grandstanded for nearly 10 minutes, to the wild applause of the media.

There’s only one problem: Kasowitz stated today that Kavanaugh had not spoken with anyone at his law firm about Mueller.

here it is if you can stand it.

https://youtu.be/Tsm1GPnlqmU

Kamala Harris is a nasty piece of work

K Harris: Did you talk w anyone at Kasowitz Benson Torres law firm?

Kavanaugh: You asked me, I need to know who works there

K Harris: I think you can answer the question without me giving you a list of all employees at that law firm

Kavanaugh: Well actually I can't

K Harris: Why not ?

Kavanaugh: Because I don't know who works there

^^he he

she is the poster child for family planning and the current definition of a twunt

amazing how she was able to get through law school - it doesn't appear that she ever learned anything

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.dailywire.com/news...umps-law-ben-shapiro

On Wednesday, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) attempted to grab the 2020 Democratic presidential limelight by launching into an attack on Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s latest pick for the Supreme Court. She essentially accused Kavanaugh of stonewalling on whether he had spoken with President Trump’s law firm about the Robert Mueller investigation.

Kavanaugh correctly said he didn’t know what she was talking about, and also said he didn’t know every lawyer at Kasowitz Benson Torres – a law firm with nearly 300 attorneys

That didn’t stop Harris, who grandstanded for nearly 10 minutes, to the wild applause of the media.

There’s only one problem: Kasowitz stated today that Kavanaugh had not spoken with anyone at his law firm about Mueller.

here it is if you can stand it.

https://youtu.be/Tsm1GPnlqmU

Kamala Harris is a nasty piece of work

K Harris: Did you talk w anyone at Kasowitz Benson Torres law firm?

Kavanaugh: You asked me, I need to know who works there

K Harris: I think you can answer the question without me giving you a list of all employees at that law firm

Kavanaugh: Well actually I can't

K Harris: Why not ?

Kavanaugh: Because I don't know who works there

It was a bullshit question. The firm touts 350 Lawyers in 9 cities. So did he, at anytime, talk to any of these 350 attorneys? It's impossible to answer and she's just another Dem (with 2 strikes against here)trying to get national name recognition.
Two things are certain. America will never elect another Black president after they were bamboozled by Obama. Obama priced to screw the blacks as well. His preference was muslims. Cliton did the same damage for a woman president. Neither will happen in my lifetime.

Senate Democrats Prove They’re Unfit to Govern

Kavanaugh hearings reveal why their symbol is the jackass.

American Spectator
David Catron

During the first two days of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee demonstrated why their party lost control of Congress, and that they still can’t be trusted with a majority in either house. In addition to interrupting the proceedings countless times on hopelessly frivolous grounds and engaging in outrageous demagoguery, they openly encouraged demonstrators to disrupt the hearings with such disgusting behavior that Judge Kavanaugh’s wife was forced to lead his children out of the room on the first day. These are the very Democrats, remember, who routinely lecture President Trump on matters of decorum.

Indeed, as if to highlight the hypocrisy of their antics, Democrat Richard Blumenthal called for an adjournment of the hearing after denouncing it as a “charade.” This is the same Senator whose attacks on the last Trump nominee to the Supreme Court — now Associate Justice Gorsuch — about his biography were so egregious that a group of Medal of Honor winners wrote an open letter reminding the public of his false claims to have served in Vietnam: “The fact you repeatedly and consistently claimed to have served in Vietnam is a gross case of stolen valor in our opinion.” But Blumenthal’s hypocrisy was just part of the opening salvo in the Democratic attempt to disrupt the hearings.

Their antics were so transparently scripted that even Slate pointed out that the first interruption of the first day’s proceedings came before the Chairman could finish his opening sentence. The story’s author suggested that the Democrats “need to move on from their Kavanaugh document obsession and focus on what really matters.” On Wednesday, they made it clear that they weren’t open to such sensible advice. Chuck Schumer attempted to have the hearing halted early, but was outmaneuvered by GOP Majority Leader McConnell, and Senator Dick Durbin actually had the crust to ask Kavanaugh to “hit the pause button” on the hearings. The judge declined this ridiculous request:

Senator, I do not believe that is consistent with what prior nominees have done who have been in this circumstance.… It’s a decision for the Senate and the executive branch. Justice [Antonin] Scalia explained that very clearly, I thought, in his hearing.

When the Democrats finally began interrogating the nominee, it became even clearer that they were acting in bad faith. Senator Feinstein asked if the President could be subpoenaed, a query involving the ongoing strategy by the Mueller investigation to snare Trump in a perjury trap. Kavanaugh didn’t bite: “That’s a hypothetical question.… As a matter of the canons of judicial independence, I can’t give you an answer on that hypothetical question.” Senator Leahy, also alluding to the Mueller investigation, asked whether President Trump could pardon himself. Kavanaugh pointed out that this was yet another hypothetical, and stuck to his policy of not engaging in such speculation:

The question of self-pardons is something I’ve never analyzed. It’s a question I have not written about.… It’s a hypothetical question that I can’t begin to answer in this context.

Democratic Senator Chris Coons, also with the Mueller investigation in mind, asked Kavanaugh about the independent counsel law and a statement the judge had once made to the effect that it was a “constitutional travesty.” Because the Senator was obviously confusing the independent counsel law with the special counsel system, Judge Kavanaugh explained that the former statute no longer exists. Coons finally unearthed his scripted question: “Can the special counsel be fired at will, or only for cause?” Kavanaugh replied, “That is an open question in which you would need to review the legal arguments and would need to keep an open mind.” Coons continued to maunder:

Frankly, judge, your views about executive power that you have detailed, what you like to overturn and what limits you think there should be, really leaves me concerned. It’s because of our current context, because of the environment that we’re operating in.

The “environment that we’re operating in” was on the mind of Senator Stolen Valor when he decided to participate in what he characterized Tuesday as a “charade.” Like every other Democrat on the committee, he had his mind on getting Trump and how Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation might impede that project. Blumenthal thus asked whether the judge would pledge to recuse himself on any future issues concerning criminal or civil liability for President Donald Trump. Kavanaugh emphasized the need for an independent judiciary, and refused to make any such pledge: “I should not and may not make a commitment about how I would handle a particular case.”

And so the long day wore on. When asked if a former president would be immune from being sued or charged with a crime long after leaving office he reiterated, “No one has ever said that the president is immune from civil or criminal process. The only question is whether the process should occur while the president is in office.” The major precedent here is, of course, the Paula Jones civil case against Bill Clinton. But that’s ancient history, and Clinton was a Democrat. His fellow Democrats on the Judicial Committee have a different set of rules for Republicans, and that could not have been clearer than it was during the first two days of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.

The confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice is a serious undertaking. But the Democrats have shown themselves to be utterly irresponsible in the discharge of their constitutional duties in this process. Their frivolous objections to proceeding with the hearings, despicable coordination with protesters whose antics were so disgusting that the nominee had to remove his children from the room, and their lack of real concern for any issue unrelated to removing the President from office reveal that the Democrats are too corrupt to be trusted with real power anytime soon. They are like Lucius in The Golden Ass. They are not utterly lost, but redemption is a long way in the future.

Link

Sen Tillis (R) ripping Booker apart. By walking thru what happened about the comm conf docs and that the staff worked all night to get them cleared.

Kamala Harris once again

Harris attacks Kavanaugh because a paper he wrote was used as a baseline for the 4 dissenting SC judges who voted to kill obamacare.

Kavanaugh responded that the paper was written to provide the "pro's" of both sides of the argument. Kavanaugh noted his paper was also described as the baseline for the other 5 SC judges who voted to uphold obamacare.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

hearing still going at 753 p EDT

Dick Durbin attacking Kavanaugh on 2nd amendment

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

Corey Booker's new name that he goes by is Spartacus. He is legend even if it's only in his own mind.

SCOTUS Fight: It Seems Red State Democrats Are Totally And Utterly Screwed

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...rly-screwed-n2516294

For liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans, it’s an easy choice regarding the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Both sides have made up their minds weeks before these hearings, which have devolved into total clown shows, started this week. With former Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl being tapped to serve the remainder of the late John McCain’s term, we have a decisive vote locked up. Kyl is probably going to vote for Kavanaugh. I’m betting McCain would have a “yea” vote as well if he were healthy. The point is the game is over. We have won. The votes are there for confirmation. It’s only a matter of time.

Yet, concerning red state Democrats, it’s a question about survival. Do they want another term or do they want to please the rabid progressive base that is virtually non-existent in their respective states. Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Indiana are not hot beds of anti-Trump resistance movement. Still, as we’ve note before, red state Democrats could back Kavanaugh, vote for him (he already has the votes), and ensure their re-elections. The downside is that they will be frozen out of Democratic circles, could reap the ire of progressives who will make their lives hell for the remainder of this election cycle and more to come, and be cut off form key fundraising and financial apparatuses essential to winning elections. The term persona non grata rings a bell.

Since President Trump nominated Kavanaugh Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Jon Tester (D-MT), Joe Donnelly, and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) have been put in a vice this cycle over this vote. Voters in their states want Kavanaugh confirmed. For at least McCaskill and Manchin it could be a vote that either breaks themor degrades their re-electionchances. It’s the reason why they’ve deployed countermeasureswhen the media is around, declining to attendthe nominating ceremony of Kavanaugh some two months ago. Either way, they’re not in an enviable position. In many ways, they’re quite screwed (via Axios):

The progressive base is demanding that Democratic senators vote no on Kavanaugh. But Republicans say support for his nomination is highest in four Trump states with Democratic senators: Montana, West Virginia, North Dakota and Missouri.

Driving the news: Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris interrupted Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing seconds after it started. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Cory Booker followed. Protestors were ushered out of the room.

Red-state Democrats are stuck between support for Kavanaugh in their home states and pressure from their party to oppose Trump nominees at all costs. Opposing Kavanaugh might be an easy call for the rest of the Democrats, but it's not an easy call for them.

Yeah, their more liberal colleagues aren’t helping them either. Election Day is 60 days away.

quote:

red state Democrats could back Kavanaugh, vote for him (he already has the votes), and ensure their re-elections. The downside is that they will be frozen out of Democratic circles,

Not really. The other Dems will pull the same stunt in 2 years to save their scaly skins.

quote:

Montana, West Virginia, North Dakota and Missouri.

C'mon, baby, four states, we got four states, just one more Senate seat, there's gotta be one more Senate seat in there!

Hey, the interesting part isn't about the upper echelons being pissed at them if they vote to confirm Kavanaugh. The interesting part is finding out how many rank and file Democrats in those states would refuse to vote for someone they consider a sellout. That's where those poor so-and-so's would really work up a sweat.

Somewhere in the dozens of stories, articles, op-eds, etc I have read this week, I recall seeing a forecast that at the end of this hearing, the reputation of Judge Kavanaugh will be enhanced, and that of the Senate diminished.

It looks to me as though that has come to pass.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
...the reputation... of the Senate diminished.

It looks to me as though that has come to pass.

Please explain that. TY

Side note: I THOROUGHLY enjoyed Sen. Cruz's and Sen. Sasse's remarks. It's amazing how the Demoshits want Judge Kavanaugh to uphold Roe v. Wade, but overturn DC v. Heller? There is precedent for both, so why overturn a precedent just because you don't like it, Demoshits? That's rhetorical...

Has it finally ended for today ?

Yep. Brett Kavanaugh can get some sleep.

Strong performance.

I'm just picking up bits and pieces from the internutz, but we're looking at, what, testimony by outside groups tomorrow (which should be as entertaining as it will be irrelevant) and then nothing until the committee votes on September 20th? Then, I suppose, we'd get the full Senate vote on confirmation itself.

I'm tempted to ask if they're waiting to deliver more documents or something. Why not go ahead and hold the committee vote earlier? The only thing I can think of is that it gives the Blue Senators from Red states more time to sweat and less time to explain their vote to the folks back home before Election Day.

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
...the reputation... of the Senate diminished.

It looks to me as though that has come to pass.

Please explain that. TY

Side note: I THOROUGHLY enjoyed Sen. Cruz's and Sen. Sasse's remarks. It's amazing how the Demoshits want Judge Kavanaugh to uphold Roe v. Wade, but overturn DC v. Heller? There is precedent for both, so why overturn a precedent just because you don't like it, Demoshits? That's rhetorical...

Judge Kavanaugh seems to be much better than advertised. I for one have been astonished by his complete command of applicable case law, not only names, but holdings, votes, dissents and what issues the dissent(s) raised, and in general every detail. He seems not only articulate but near unflappable.

Senators have, mostly, seemed less so. The GDCs have put on an appalling display of childish vitriol. Mike Lee has been impressive particularly. Flake seems out of place. The place seems to be powered by hypocrisy and sanctimony which are employed in copious quantity and apparently never in short supply.

As far as the precedents you mention, one is mentioned in the Constitution, the other isn’t.

quote:

Originally posted by yanici:
Corey Booker's new name that he goes by is Spartacus. He is legend even if it's only in his own mind.

Cory,do you like movies about gladiators?




Link to original video: https://youtu.be/eeNsPE5XUXA

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Has it finally ended for today ?

Yep. Brett Kavanaugh can get some sleep.

Strong performance.

The man is an oak.