One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Main
Judge Brett Kavanaugh's view of the power of the presidency
If you would like to post a reply, then please login (if you already have an account) or register (if you don't).
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
Jul 10, 2018 17:53:11   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
In a striking passage from an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so. And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump has chosen a man for the Supreme Court who has sterling academic credentials; a long record of public service; a trove of almost 300 judicial opinions, many highly regarded; an appealing personal story; a lovely family—and a radically expansive view of the power of the presidency.

Judge Kavanaugh has long been seen as a conservative legal superstar. From an early age, he was groomed for a top position in the legal firmament, mentored by prominent conservatives, steered into nationwide networks of contacts and opportunities, hired for plum jobs, and promoted ever upwards.

By the way, conservatives do this sort of thing much better than liberals.

The Federalist Society, which for decades has spearheaded the campaign to take back the courts in the name of an approach to legal thinking that is focused on the original meaning of the Constitution and laws, is the de facto gatekeeper for Republican judicial nominations.

It is also a rich source of academic research and debate advancing conservative legal ideas.

And it’s a kind of club whose members are bound for life in a great mission: undoing the liberal legal revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.

If Judge Kavanaugh becomes Justice Kavanaugh, it will be the greatest triumph of the Federalist Society. And it’s one of the most significant accomplishments in recent American political history.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has sparked a great deal of concern on the left about issues like abortion, affirmative action, gay rights, and other social issues. There’s another issue, however, where Kavanaugh has staked out strikingly hard-right positions: executive power.

Before becoming a judge, Kavanaugh spent most of his career working for the executive branch of the federal government—in the Justice Department under President George H. W. Bush; in Ken Starr’s Office of the Independent Counsel investigating President Bill Clinton; in the White House counsel’s office under President George W. Bush; and finally as President Bush’s White House staff secretary.

These increasingly powerful (and yet professionally narrow) positions seem to have given Kavanaugh a sweeping, even unbalanced view of how powerful presidents should be under the law.

For instance, on the federal appeals court in Washington, Kavanaugh has argued for expansive presidential authority in what used to be called “the global war on terror,” especially when it comes to the incarceration and treatment of accused enemy combatants.

He has also called for overturning a landmark 1935 New Deal-era Supreme Court opinion that for 83 years has been one of the foundations of modern American governance. It’s called Humprey’s Executor vs. United States, and in it, a unanimous Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Election Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and many dozens more. Kavanaugh views the very independence of these agencies as an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the president.

There’s more. In a striking passage in an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so.

"To be sure, the President has the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," he wrote. "That certainly means that the Executive has to follow and comply with laws regulating the executive branch - at least unless the President deems the law unconstitutional in which event the President can decline to follow the statute until a final court order says otherwise."

And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”

He called on Congress to protect presidents from the exact same kind of wide-ranging probe he enthusiastically participated in when he worked as a key aide to Ken Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton.

“Congress should give back to the President the full power to act when he believes that a particular independent counsel is 'out to get him.' Such a step not only would make the special counsel accountable, but it also would force the President and his surrogates to put up or shut up.”

And he also wrote, “In particular, Congress might consider a law exempting a President-while in office-from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel."

Read that first sentence again. It almost sounds like the kind of thing President Trump might tweet when he rails against what he calls the “witch hunt” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

When precisely Kavanaugh changed his mind about the wisdom of partisan-tinged investigations of presidents is unclear. But you can bet senators will want to know the answer to that question, and to many more as they come to a decision about whether this advocate of such expansive presidential powers is the right choice at this historical moment to take the place of Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
 
Jul 10, 2018 18:07:49   #
emarine (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
In a striking passage from an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so. And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump has chosen a man for the Supreme Court who has sterling academic credentials; a long record of public service; a trove of almost 300 judicial opinions, many highly regarded; an appealing personal story; a lovely family—and a radically expansive view of the power of the presidency.

Judge Kavanaugh has long been seen as a conservative legal superstar. From an early age, he was groomed for a top position in the legal firmament, mentored by prominent conservatives, steered into nationwide networks of contacts and opportunities, hired for plum jobs, and promoted ever upwards.

By the way, conservatives do this sort of thing much better than liberals.

The Federalist Society, which for decades has spearheaded the campaign to take back the courts in the name of an approach to legal thinking that is focused on the original meaning of the Constitution and laws, is the de facto gatekeeper for Republican judicial nominations.

It is also a rich source of academic research and debate advancing conservative legal ideas.

And it’s a kind of club whose members are bound for life in a great mission: undoing the liberal legal revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.

If Judge Kavanaugh becomes Justice Kavanaugh, it will be the greatest triumph of the Federalist Society. And it’s one of the most significant accomplishments in recent American political history.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has sparked a great deal of concern on the left about issues like abortion, affirmative action, gay rights, and other social issues. There’s another issue, however, where Kavanaugh has staked out strikingly hard-right positions: executive power.

Before becoming a judge, Kavanaugh spent most of his career working for the executive branch of the federal government—in the Justice Department under President George H. W. Bush; in Ken Starr’s Office of the Independent Counsel investigating President Bill Clinton; in the White House counsel’s office under President George W. Bush; and finally as President Bush’s White House staff secretary.

These increasingly powerful (and yet professionally narrow) positions seem to have given Kavanaugh a sweeping, even unbalanced view of how powerful presidents should be under the law.

For instance, on the federal appeals court in Washington, Kavanaugh has argued for expansive presidential authority in what used to be called “the global war on terror,” especially when it comes to the incarceration and treatment of accused enemy combatants.

He has also called for overturning a landmark 1935 New Deal-era Supreme Court opinion that for 83 years has been one of the foundations of modern American governance. It’s called Humprey’s Executor vs. United States, and in it, a unanimous Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Election Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and many dozens more. Kavanaugh views the very independence of these agencies as an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the president.

There’s more. In a striking passage in an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so.

"To be sure, the President has the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," he wrote. "That certainly means that the Executive has to follow and comply with laws regulating the executive branch - at least unless the President deems the law unconstitutional in which event the President can decline to follow the statute until a final court order says otherwise."

And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”

He called on Congress to protect presidents from the exact same kind of wide-ranging probe he enthusiastically participated in when he worked as a key aide to Ken Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton.

“Congress should give back to the President the full power to act when he believes that a particular independent counsel is 'out to get him.' Such a step not only would make the special counsel accountable, but it also would force the President and his surrogates to put up or shut up.”

And he also wrote, “In particular, Congress might consider a law exempting a President-while in office-from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel."

Read that first sentence again. It almost sounds like the kind of thing President Trump might tweet when he rails against what he calls the “witch hunt” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

When precisely Kavanaugh changed his mind about the wisdom of partisan-tinged investigations of presidents is unclear. But you can bet senators will want to know the answer to that question, and to many more as they come to a decision about whether this advocate of such expansive presidential powers is the right choice at this historical moment to take the place of Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
In a striking passage from an academic article, Ka... (show quote)




This is something that Trump is truly good at & has worked well for him for decades... Buying his way around the law... This is how Plutocrats always prosper ...
Jul 10, 2018 18:19:33   #
Richard Rowland (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
In a striking passage from an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so. And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump has chosen a man for the Supreme Court who has sterling academic credentials; a long record of public service; a trove of almost 300 judicial opinions, many highly regarded; an appealing personal story; a lovely family—and a radically expansive view of the power of the presidency.

Judge Kavanaugh has long been seen as a conservative legal superstar. From an early age, he was groomed for a top position in the legal firmament, mentored by prominent conservatives, steered into nationwide networks of contacts and opportunities, hired for plum jobs, and promoted ever upwards.

By the way, conservatives do this sort of thing much better than liberals.

The Federalist Society, which for decades has spearheaded the campaign to take back the courts in the name of an approach to legal thinking that is focused on the original meaning of the Constitution and laws, is the de facto gatekeeper for Republican judicial nominations.

It is also a rich source of academic research and debate advancing conservative legal ideas.

And it’s a kind of club whose members are bound for life in a great mission: undoing the liberal legal revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.

If Judge Kavanaugh becomes Justice Kavanaugh, it will be the greatest triumph of the Federalist Society. And it’s one of the most significant accomplishments in recent American political history.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has sparked a great deal of concern on the left about issues like abortion, affirmative action, gay rights, and other social issues. There’s another issue, however, where Kavanaugh has staked out strikingly hard-right positions: executive power.

Before becoming a judge, Kavanaugh spent most of his career working for the executive branch of the federal government—in the Justice Department under President George H. W. Bush; in Ken Starr’s Office of the Independent Counsel investigating President Bill Clinton; in the White House counsel’s office under President George W. Bush; and finally as President Bush’s White House staff secretary.

These increasingly powerful (and yet professionally narrow) positions seem to have given Kavanaugh a sweeping, even unbalanced view of how powerful presidents should be under the law.

For instance, on the federal appeals court in Washington, Kavanaugh has argued for expansive presidential authority in what used to be called “the global war on terror,” especially when it comes to the incarceration and treatment of accused enemy combatants.

He has also called for overturning a landmark 1935 New Deal-era Supreme Court opinion that for 83 years has been one of the foundations of modern American governance. It’s called Humprey’s Executor vs. United States, and in it, a unanimous Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Election Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and many dozens more. Kavanaugh views the very independence of these agencies as an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the president.

There’s more. In a striking passage in an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so.

"To be sure, the President has the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," he wrote. "That certainly means that the Executive has to follow and comply with laws regulating the executive branch - at least unless the President deems the law unconstitutional in which event the President can decline to follow the statute until a final court order says otherwise."

And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”

He called on Congress to protect presidents from the exact same kind of wide-ranging probe he enthusiastically participated in when he worked as a key aide to Ken Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton.

“Congress should give back to the President the full power to act when he believes that a particular independent counsel is 'out to get him.' Such a step not only would make the special counsel accountable, but it also would force the President and his surrogates to put up or shut up.”

And he also wrote, “In particular, Congress might consider a law exempting a President-while in office-from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel."

Read that first sentence again. It almost sounds like the kind of thing President Trump might tweet when he rails against what he calls the “witch hunt” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

When precisely Kavanaugh changed his mind about the wisdom of partisan-tinged investigations of presidents is unclear. But you can bet senators will want to know the answer to that question, and to many more as they come to a decision about whether this advocate of such expansive presidential powers is the right choice at this historical moment to take the place of Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
In a striking passage from an academic article, Ka... (show quote)


A few of the folks on Fox and Friends aren't all that enthusiastic about Judge Kavanaugh, The comment was that Judge Kavanaugh, is who the swamp wanted. Also, while listening to the radio, it was said that Justice Kennedy's decision to step down was predicated on a guarantee from the president that his replacement would be Judge Kavanaugh. The more we learn, the more an odor is beginning to waft.
Jul 10, 2018 18:23:33   #
Super Dave
 
emarine wrote:
This is something that Trump is truly good at & has worked well for him for decades... Buying his way around the law... This is how Plutocrats always prosper ...
It's been going on for decades but Democrats just discovered it when he announced his run for POTUS.

Really?
Jul 10, 2018 18:32:34   #
bahmer (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
In a striking passage from an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so. And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump has chosen a man for the Supreme Court who has sterling academic credentials; a long record of public service; a trove of almost 300 judicial opinions, many highly regarded; an appealing personal story; a lovely family—and a radically expansive view of the power of the presidency.

Judge Kavanaugh has long been seen as a conservative legal superstar. From an early age, he was groomed for a top position in the legal firmament, mentored by prominent conservatives, steered into nationwide networks of contacts and opportunities, hired for plum jobs, and promoted ever upwards.

By the way, conservatives do this sort of thing much better than liberals.

The Federalist Society, which for decades has spearheaded the campaign to take back the courts in the name of an approach to legal thinking that is focused on the original meaning of the Constitution and laws, is the de facto gatekeeper for Republican judicial nominations.

It is also a rich source of academic research and debate advancing conservative legal ideas.

And it’s a kind of club whose members are bound for life in a great mission: undoing the liberal legal revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.

If Judge Kavanaugh becomes Justice Kavanaugh, it will be the greatest triumph of the Federalist Society. And it’s one of the most significant accomplishments in recent American political history.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has sparked a great deal of concern on the left about issues like abortion, affirmative action, gay rights, and other social issues. There’s another issue, however, where Kavanaugh has staked out strikingly hard-right positions: executive power.

Before becoming a judge, Kavanaugh spent most of his career working for the executive branch of the federal government—in the Justice Department under President George H. W. Bush; in Ken Starr’s Office of the Independent Counsel investigating President Bill Clinton; in the White House counsel’s office under President George W. Bush; and finally as President Bush’s White House staff secretary.

These increasingly powerful (and yet professionally narrow) positions seem to have given Kavanaugh a sweeping, even unbalanced view of how powerful presidents should be under the law.

For instance, on the federal appeals court in Washington, Kavanaugh has argued for expansive presidential authority in what used to be called “the global war on terror,” especially when it comes to the incarceration and treatment of accused enemy combatants.

He has also called for overturning a landmark 1935 New Deal-era Supreme Court opinion that for 83 years has been one of the foundations of modern American governance. It’s called Humprey’s Executor vs. United States, and in it, a unanimous Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Election Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and many dozens more. Kavanaugh views the very independence of these agencies as an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the president.

There’s more. In a striking passage in an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so.

"To be sure, the President has the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," he wrote. "That certainly means that the Executive has to follow and comply with laws regulating the executive branch - at least unless the President deems the law unconstitutional in which event the President can decline to follow the statute until a final court order says otherwise."

And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”

He called on Congress to protect presidents from the exact same kind of wide-ranging probe he enthusiastically participated in when he worked as a key aide to Ken Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton.

“Congress should give back to the President the full power to act when he believes that a particular independent counsel is 'out to get him.' Such a step not only would make the special counsel accountable, but it also would force the President and his surrogates to put up or shut up.”

And he also wrote, “In particular, Congress might consider a law exempting a President-while in office-from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel."

Read that first sentence again. It almost sounds like the kind of thing President Trump might tweet when he rails against what he calls the “witch hunt” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

When precisely Kavanaugh changed his mind about the wisdom of partisan-tinged investigations of presidents is unclear. But you can bet senators will want to know the answer to that question, and to many more as they come to a decision about whether this advocate of such expansive presidential powers is the right choice at this historical moment to take the place of Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
In a striking passage from an academic article, Ka... (show quote)


All that I can say is if this is all true then the democrats had better get out the vote and put this one in the cooler. I am sure that Trump has other picks to put out there that would be more acceptable to the democrats but given the political landscape today I truly doubt that any pick from Trump would be acceptable from the democrats. That being said then maybe the left should just ask Trump to show them all of the candidates that he has and have the democrats chose one that they like ths best and go from there. Oh that is not how it is done is it then I guess that the will have to get together and vote him down if they can. Lets see if the liberal democrats can get together for anything more serious than bashing Trumps cabinet and chasing them out of restaurants and then following them to the next restaurant and heckling them there. Instead of sitting there and whining maye they should get up and put their big boys and girls clothes on decide if socialism is really the direction that they want to head in and get the reins on their hauled up short and start to straighten their party out. Remember what was said when Harry Reid pulled the nuclear option that he was going to regret it and the democrats did. The democrats are asking for a major resistance if they were to ever win back the presidency. Karma is a bitch is something that they should be considering at this point in time.
Jul 10, 2018 18:36:36   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
bahmer wrote:
All that I can say is if this is all true then the democrats had better get out the vote and put this one in the cooler. I am sure that Trump has other picks to put out there that would be more acceptable to the democrats but given the political landscape today I truly doubt that any pick from Trump would be acceptable from the democrats. That being said then maybe the left should just ask Trump to show them all of the candidates that he has and have the democrats chose one that they like the best and go from there. Oh that is not how it is done is it then I guess that the will have to get together and vote him down if they can. Lets see if the liberal democrats can get together for anything more serious than bashing Trumps cabinet and chasing them out of restaurants and then following them to the next restaurant and heckling them there. Instead of sitting there and whining maybe they should get up and put their big boys and girls clothes on decide if socialism is really the direction that they want to head in and get the reins on their hauled up short and start to straighten their party out. Remember what was said when Harry Reid pulled the nuclear option that he was going to regret it and the democrats did. The democrats are asking for a major resistance if they were to ever win back the presidency. Karma is a bitch is something that they should be considering at this point in time.
All that I can say is if this is all true then the... (show quote)

B, I'm guessing they're feeling the karma.
 
Jul 10, 2018 18:43:17   #
lindajoy (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
In a striking passage from an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so. And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump has chosen a man for the Supreme Court who has sterling academic credentials; a long record of public service; a trove of almost 300 judicial opinions, many highly regarded; an appealing personal story; a lovely family—and a radically expansive view of the power of the presidency.

Judge Kavanaugh has long been seen as a conservative legal superstar. From an early age, he was groomed for a top position in the legal firmament, mentored by prominent conservatives, steered into nationwide networks of contacts and opportunities, hired for plum jobs, and promoted ever upwards.

By the way, conservatives do this sort of thing much better than liberals.

The Federalist Society, which for decades has spearheaded the campaign to take back the courts in the name of an approach to legal thinking that is focused on the original meaning of the Constitution and laws, is the de facto gatekeeper for Republican judicial nominations.

It is also a rich source of academic research and debate advancing conservative legal ideas.

And it’s a kind of club whose members are bound for life in a great mission: undoing the liberal legal revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.

If Judge Kavanaugh becomes Justice Kavanaugh, it will be the greatest triumph of the Federalist Society. And it’s one of the most significant accomplishments in recent American political history.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has sparked a great deal of concern on the left about issues like abortion, affirmative action, gay rights, and other social issues. There’s another issue, however, where Kavanaugh has staked out strikingly hard-right positions: executive power.

Before becoming a judge, Kavanaugh spent most of his career working for the executive branch of the federal government—in the Justice Department under President George H. W. Bush; in Ken Starr’s Office of the Independent Counsel investigating President Bill Clinton; in the White House counsel’s office under President George W. Bush; and finally as President Bush’s White House staff secretary.

These increasingly powerful (and yet professionally narrow) positions seem to have given Kavanaugh a sweeping, even unbalanced view of how powerful presidents should be under the law.

For instance, on the federal appeals court in Washington, Kavanaugh has argued for expansive presidential authority in what used to be called “the global war on terror,” especially when it comes to the incarceration and treatment of accused enemy combatants.

He has also called for overturning a landmark 1935 New Deal-era Supreme Court opinion that for 83 years has been one of the foundations of modern American governance. It’s called Humprey’s Executor vs. United States, and in it, a unanimous Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Election Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and many dozens more. Kavanaugh views the very independence of these agencies as an unconstitutional infringement on the power of the president.

There’s more. In a striking passage in an academic article, Kavanaugh once suggested a president does not have to follow the law if he or she finds it unconstitutional until ordered by a court to do so.

"To be sure, the President has the duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," he wrote. "That certainly means that the Executive has to follow and comply with laws regulating the executive branch - at least unless the President deems the law unconstitutional in which event the President can decline to follow the statute until a final court order says otherwise."

And, as you may have heard, Kavanaugh believes that the American president should be immune from criminal investigation and prosecution while in office, and should be able to fire any special counsel he feels is “out to get him.”

He called on Congress to protect presidents from the exact same kind of wide-ranging probe he enthusiastically participated in when he worked as a key aide to Ken Starr’s investigation of Bill Clinton.

“Congress should give back to the President the full power to act when he believes that a particular independent counsel is 'out to get him.' Such a step not only would make the special counsel accountable, but it also would force the President and his surrogates to put up or shut up.”

And he also wrote, “In particular, Congress might consider a law exempting a President-while in office-from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel."

Read that first sentence again. It almost sounds like the kind of thing President Trump might tweet when he rails against what he calls the “witch hunt” of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

When precisely Kavanaugh changed his mind about the wisdom of partisan-tinged investigations of presidents is unclear. But you can bet senators will want to know the answer to that question, and to many more as they come to a decision about whether this advocate of such expansive presidential powers is the right choice at this historical moment to take the place of Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court.
In a striking passage from an academic article, Ka... (show quote)


Do you have anything more on the acedemic article referenced in your article..???

I’d love to read that along with now having more to vet..... Thanks ..😢

Too early for me to make more comments I’ve got to finish my own vetting on him..

Interesting how all those accomplishments he’s achieved are viewed in the negative vs the positive showing of a go getter all through his career, whom has had excellent schooling of Constitutional law..

Candidly slatt I don’t care who is put up the dems are not going to approve anyone forcing the nucleur option.. Heck it could be you or I and there will not be agreement achieved.. Not because the person is not qualified but rather because its an appointment by Trump..

We can all argue our points until we’re blue in the face and you know as well as I the only thing that will happen is the nuclear option.. The travesty of Reid putting that forward really deminished our system then to now..
What a shame it really was even when warned it will come back to bite him/them later..
Jul 10, 2018 18:46:29   #
emarine (a regular here)
 
Super Dave wrote:
It's been going on for decades but Democrats just discovered it when he announced his run for POTUS.

Really?




Looks like Democrats were on to it long ago... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy
Jul 10, 2018 18:47:56   #
bahmer (a regular here)
 
slatten49 wrote:
B, I'm guessing they're feeling the karma.


Well should the democrat party not be reeling in the Maxine Water's and the Nancy Pelosi's and the Chuck Schumer's and start having cooler heads reign in their party and try to control this vitriol that is tearing this country apart. This is not doing themany good and it certainly isn't doing the country any good. My god man we are almost on the brink of another civil war with this rhetoric. I don't know how long we can go before someone looses it and pulls a gun and then we are all going to start to pay. The election is over and now it is time to be big boys and girls and realize what has happened and go from there. We aren't going to push Trump out of the White House and even if you could and did that would be an even greater threat to war than where we are at now. My not so humble opinion.
Jul 10, 2018 18:52:26   #
bahmer (a regular here)
 
lindajoy wrote:
Do you have anything more on the acedemic article referenced in your article..???

I’d love to read that along with now having more to vet..... Thanks ..😢

Too early for me to make more comments I’ve got to finish my own vetting on him..

Interesting how all those accomplishments he’s achieved are viewed in the negative vs the positive showing of a go getter all through his career, whom has had excellent schooling of Constitutional law..

Candidly slatt I don’t care who is put up the dems are not going to approve anyone forcing the nucleur option.. Heck it could be you or I and there will not be agreement achieved.. Not because the person is not qualified but rather because its an appointment by Trump..

We can all argue our points until we’re blue in the face and you know as well as I the only thing that will happen is the nuclear option.. The travesty of Reid putting that forward really deminished our system then to now..
What a shame it really was even when warned it will come back to bite him/them later..
Do you have anything more on the acedemic article ... (show quote)


Did you get my comment about your beer tastes.
Jul 10, 2018 18:53:34   #
lindajoy (a regular here)
 
bahmer wrote:
All that I can say is if this is all true then the democrats had better get out the vote and put this one in the cooler. I am sure that Trump has other picks to put out there that would be more acceptable to the democrats but given the political landscape today I truly doubt that any pick from Trump would be acceptable from the democrats. That being said then maybe the left should just ask Trump to show them all of the candidates that he has and have the democrats chose one that they like ths best and go from there. Oh that is not how it is done is it then I guess that the will have to get together and vote him down if they can. Lets see if the liberal democrats can get together for anything more serious than bashing Trumps cabinet and chasing them out of restaurants and then following them to the next restaurant and heckling them there. Instead of sitting there and whining maye they should get up and put their big boys and girls clothes on decide if socialism is really the direction that they want to head in and get the reins on their hauled up short and start to straighten their party out. Remember what was said when Harry Reid pulled the nuclear option that he was going to regret it and the democrats did. The democrats are asking for a major resistance if they were to ever win back the presidency. Karma is a bitch is something that they should be considering at this point in time.
All that I can say is if this is all true then the... (show quote)


I wish the very same, that the supposed parties could come together for a mutual approval...However given the last year and a half they can’t agree the sun is shining let alone actually compromise to advance the good of our country instead of what has been...
 
Jul 10, 2018 18:55:10   #
bahmer (a regular here)
 
lindajoy wrote:
I wish the very same, that the supposed parties could come together for a mutual approval...However given the last year and a half they can’t agree the sun is shining let alone actually compromise to advance the good of our country instead of what has been...


Amen and Amen
Jul 10, 2018 18:59:42   #
Richard Rowland (a regular here)
 
lindajoy wrote:
Do you have anything more on the acedemic article referenced in your article..???

I’d love to read that along with now having more to vet..... Thanks ..😢

Too early for me to make more comments I’ve got to finish my own vetting on him..

Interesting how all those accomplishments he’s achieved are viewed in the negative vs the positive showing of a go getter all through his career, whom has had excellent schooling of Constitutional law..

Candidly slatt I don’t care who is put up the dems are not going to approve anyone forcing the nucleur option.. Heck it could be you or I and there will not be agreement achieved.. Not because the person is not qualified but rather because its an appointment by Trump..

We can all argue our points until we’re blue in the face and you know as well as I the only thing that will happen is the nuclear option.. The travesty of Reid putting that forward really deminished our system then to now..
What a shame it really was even when warned it will come back to bite him/them later..
Do you have anything more on the acedemic article ... (show quote)


https://www.newsmax.com/patrickbuchanan/court-trump-justices-warren/2018/07/09/id/870790/
Jul 10, 2018 19:00:22   #
slatten49 (a regular here)
 
lindajoy wrote:
Do you have anything more on the acedemic article referenced in your article..???

I’d love to read that along with now having more to vet..... Thanks ..😢

Too early for me to make more comments I’ve got to finish my own vetting on him..

Interesting how all those accomplishments he’s achieved are viewed in the negative vs the positive showing of a go getter all through his career, whom has had excellent schooling of Constitutional law..

Candidly slatt I don’t care who is put up the dems are not going to approve anyone forcing the nucleur option.. Heck it could be you or I and there will not be agreement achieved.. Not because the person is not qualified but rather because its an appointment by Trump..

We can all argue our points until we’re blue in the face and you know as well as I the only thing that will happen is the nuclear option.. The travesty of Reid putting that forward really deminished our system then to now..
What a shame it really was even when warned it will come back to bite him/them later..
Do you have anything more on the acedemic article ... (show quote)

Nah, L-J, all I am aware of with regard to that "academic article" is the vague reference to it in this article pulled from the internet. This all seems another example of "politics as usual." I still think Merrick Garland is as good as any to be picked. But, he had his day in the limelight, and was victimized, again, by "politics as usual." The following quote attributed to Mark Twain sums up politics...."The political and commercial morals of the United States (Congress) are not merely food for laughter, they are an entire banquet."

I added (Congress).
Jul 10, 2018 19:01:58   #
lindajoy (a regular here)
 
Super Dave wrote:
It's been going on for decades but Democrats just discovered it when he announced his run for POTUS.

Really?


Yes, it has... The only difference is which big money paid the most for that party to win this time around...

Once placed in position then the fascism, capitalism, socialism, any ism you want takes over for whatever they are looking to achieve..

All just a facade as they throw out things to keep the people against each other (control) and pittance in strengthening the economy or breaking it like 2008 .. Is it no wonder true growth for our country has stagnated regardless of the party?

Been checking out some Island, a little place with a different pace~~ Sure looking better every day.~<<
Page: 1 2 3 next>>
Main
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2018 IDF International Technologies, Inc.