Oj, was found guilty in a civil suit. not another criminal case.. a 2nd criminal case can not happen due to the double jeopardy rule..

My statement was poor, the upcoming case is about the presidents pardon affecting both federal and state law.. nothing about the power of the court..

while my opposition would be firm on any judge nominated by trump or even only a conservative president, after all a conservative court gave us "citizen united" basis for the horrible condition of our politics.


My comments have been about this...

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/10/charles-schumer/trumps-supreme-court-pick-said-presidents-shouldnt/
Minnesota Law Review article
The statement by Kavanaugh stems from his 2009 article in the Minnesota Law Review about the separation of powers.

his passage by Kavanaugh:

"Even the lesser burdens of a criminal investigation — including preparing for questioning by criminal investigators — are time-consuming and distracting. Like civil suits, criminal investigations take the president’s focus away from his or her responsibilities to the people. And a president who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as president."

Kavanaugh also wrote that the Constitution already provides a check on executive power, because an impeached president is then subject to criminal prosecution.

"In short, the Constitution establishes a clear mechanism to deter executive malfeasance; we should not burden a sitting president with civil suits, criminal investigations, or criminal prosecutions. The president’s job is difficult enough as is. And the country loses when the president’s focus is distracted by the burdens of civil litigation or criminal investigation and possible prosecution."

In a footnote, Kavanaugh wrote that the independent counsel statute, which was used by Kenneth Starr to investigate Clinton, "was a major mistake."

Just in; 10% upswing in Republican enthusiasm going into the midterms. Why is this important? Generally most midterms are notoriously bad elections for the people in power. We won, so we become complacent. It is the number one driving force in mid term turnout. The Republican voters, for various reasons have not been thrilled with having to go back and put a group of "milk toast" politicians back in power. The only reason they've been willing at all IMO is the Democrats are pseudo communists, unhinged lying American disparaging pigs. Still Republican enthusiasm was not high; until this public lynching of the Kavanaugh family. Just today it was announced by the New York Times that the Serial rapist Judge Kavanaugh threw ice in college at a bar. Oh the humanity. The FBI has tried to uncover evidence (the Ice) of this terrorist act but the evidence, according to Democrats mysteriously disappeared.

as the orange people always do, you are mixing quarterly figures with annual figures..

Now GDP is 4.1 This in a quarterly rate, President Obama had higher rate a number of times.

The highest GDP growth of Obama's presidency was during the third quarter of 2014, when it hit 5.2 percent.

The first reading of real growth domestic product for the fourth quarter of 2017 was published Friday by the government's Bureau of Economic Analysis, and it shows an increase of only 2.6%. For the whole year, the

increase in real GDP is 2.3%. That's better than the 1.5% growth rate in 2016, the last year of Barack Obama's second term, but only a tiny hair better than the average over Obama's full second term.

You stated that he believes the double jeopardy rule would prevent states from prosecuting someone pardoned at the federal level, then say he would fully pardon all the people guilty of covering for trump. Your statements are problematic on multiple levels.

1) A judge (even of the Supreme Court) does not have the power to pardon someone convicted of a crime. A new ruling can be made under appeal which would change a verdict. But this is NOT a pardon. A pardon is not granted by the judicial branch but by the executive branch. It is an acknowledgement of guilt, but then forgives the guilt. While a change of verdict is done by the judicial branch and does not acknowledge and forgive guilt but instead changed a verdict from guilty to not guilty.

2) What convictions are you referring to? In fact what crime?