Speculation: Did Trump just make the dumbest decision of his life?

[marylandblue]

Of the four finalists, McConnell told Trump that Hardiman and Kethledge would make it through the Senate, and said so publicly. It's unusual for the Majority Leader to basically tell the President who to pick, in public. It must mean that McConnell was trying to box Trump into picking one of those two. Which means he knows there are Republicans who won't vote for Kavanaugh. But of course, Trump picked the guy who thinks presidents can't be indicted.

[roamer65]

1. It just has to be stalled until January.

Flip the Senate and this nomination is DOA.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

2. NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.

It's summertime. Why all the Congressmen in Wash DC this summer? Aren't they supposed to be talking to their constituents? (Like the Russian Contingent)
Any other time they HAVE to have two day work weeks and the ENTIRE summer off...bc the jobs so hard.

[lunatica]

7. I think August is the official down time for Congress

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

9. Ahhhhhhhh

Bc in every summer past since Kennedy...seems everyone checks out all summer. Well, they had to work a full week back then so...

[Stinky The Clown]

10. Not this year. Turtle cancelled it.

Seriously. No August recess for the Senate.

Vote for the Judge

No campaigning for the red state blue senators.

Neat, huh?

That Mitch is quite the guy, hey?

[Fred Sanders]

19. Just taking orders from the fascist Federalist Society, what else could Mitch do? Bite the hand that

feeds him and his ego?

[agincourt]

20. Maybe they should try obstructionism

Rocket mortars across the aisles instead of handshakes.

[lunatica]

23. The Dems could start by taking off the kid gloves in this gun fight.

[bigbrother05]

29. Sure, makes sense ... wait a minute, he cancelled before Kennedy announced

It's almost like he knew it was coming, just like in 2016.

Bastards, one and all.

[bluestarone]

42. This is my thoughts as well

[Amishman]

8. Too much time

I honestly hope that this is over quickly, so it doesn't linger ling enough to fire up the Pub base for the midterms.

I think the most damaging possibility is a dramatic Senate hearing process with a narrow failed vote right before the election. The right gets their tighty whities in a knot, vote in drones, and the lame duck senate session confirms kethledge in December.

[brooklynite]

40. Tell us how to flip the Senate...

I'm doing what I can, but it involves holding five Red State seats (MO, ND, IN, WV, FL), where the incumbents will be expected to state a position on Kavanaugh whether they vote for him or not.

[Sneederbunk]

3. He thought presidents couldn't be indicted before he met Trump.

[marylandblue]

6. Making him the obvious choice for Trump, but

Why did McConnell think he couldn't be confirmed? Surely that wasn't the issue for McConnell.

[wonkwest]

13. McConnell may have been looking for an ideologue

We're in very early going as far as knowing who this guy is, but by very early accounts, it seems like this guy may not be the demon we've feared. All statements unearthed so far, for example, seem to point towards him leaving Roe v Wade quite alone. One thing that keeps cropping up again and again is him leaving precedent alone.

I say seem, because we don't know what's going to be unearthed by our side. And our side is definitely going to go adiggin'.

Before long, I suspect we will know quite a bit.

But, this guy doesn't seem to be the fire-breathing right-winger activist McConnell may have preferred. Conservative, very much so. But word around is that he was Kennedy's pic to replace him, which is interesting. Kennedy is a vain justice, and he likes to see himself as a hero arbiter of social progress on the Big Issues.

[lunatica]

24. Where are you getting that information

Certainly not where I’ve been looking. This guy has proven himself to be politically active in all, ALL, his opinions. All of them, and he’s been prolific in his decisions and written opinions. Just reading through them will guarantee the process of vetting him will take some time. He is clearly Trump’s wet dream come true.

Kavanaugh worked with Ken Starr and wrote the final report on Bill Clinton so at one time he seems to have been all for going after the President, yet now he has written that it’s unconstitutional to pursue any legal action against a President. That includes impeachment, or, as is suspected, any crime Mueller will find that Trump has committed. Trump would get off scott free. Is it a wonder Trump picked him? Trump doesn’t do anything that doesn’t benefit him personally.

He worked in the Bush Administration in a very powerful position as a Bush aid. He was virtually part of every single policy decision made during that administration, which includes the lies they told to go to war with Iraq. Remember those lies? Or maybe you think they weren’t so bad?

And then there is his far right views on the 2nd Amendment. In his perfect world there would be no constraints on any kind of weapon the NRA espouses. He approves of semi automatic weapons and his judicial reason is because they are not singled out in the constitution as being exceptions to the 2nd amendment.

He doesn’t believe healthcare for everyone is Constitutionally mandated or that women have the right to choose. He denied a 17 year old illegal alien the choice to have an abortion and did his best to delay the court decision so the lawful period of having an abortion would pass. He was stopped in time and the court granted the girl her request.

I am curious as to where you get your information and why you think that Kavanaugh is benign in any way.

[wonkwest]

25. Just at a glance, your information is incredibly wrong

He said impeachment can't happen?

Please cite. Because that one is as wrong as wrong can be.

Everyone needs to take a breath, wait for the actual facts about this man to emerge, then we go from there.

The Democratic caucus seems inclined to oppose him across the board. And given what happened with Garland, and the fact Trump shouldn't be making the appointment to begin with, I'm 100% on board with that.

I agree with you, he's a 2nd Amendment absolutist. And he is a Bushian Republican. Those are facts.

But I'd like to weed facts from internet hysteria. I just think it's healthy that we keep our heads. Level heads make for better strategy. And right now, we need some strategy in 2018 and 2020.

[lunatica]

26. Google is your friend

That’s how I researched it. Find out for yourself. It’s front and center in articles by The Atlantic, Daily Beast and even pro gun publications like Bearing Arms who consider him an excellent pick.

[wonkwest]

34. That's not an answer, and context is important

What Kavenaugh said was that presidents shouldn't be subject to civil cases during their presidency. He supported criminal charges against Clinton for obstruction and perjury, and he supported impeachment against him.

The context of his opinion is that civil suits are cumbersome to a president and should wait until they're out of office.

There is a HUGE difference there. Trump is the subject of a criminal investigation.

And where you got that bit about no impeachment is beyond me. It's made up out of whole cloth.

[Eyeball_Kid]

31. From my news gathering, Kavanaugh did NOT write that indicting a sitting president...

is unconstitutional. He wrote that Congress should address the issue and write a bill designating that a president is immune from criminal prosecution until AFTER his/her term expires and s/he's no longer in office. It was/is his OPINION that sitting presidents should have any indictments deferred until after leaving public office. He did not say that indictments are unconstitutional. The clear implication in his writings is that this and related issues are not within the purview of the Supreme Court's role.

If Kavanaugh plays a political game, he'll ignore his technical reading of the Court's constitutional role and turn the issue into one in which the Court becomes an activist body for legislation. That's always possible, but getting there requires that he travel a winding and bumpy road. One of the options that is available to Committee members is to place Kavanaugh under oath, then ask him if, based upon the context of his nomination (including the compendium of his legal opinions), he will RECUSE himself from any legal disputes involving Trumpy's alleged criminal activity. That's a fair and obvious question.

[lunatica]

32. Thank you for the correction.

[marylandblue]

35. Fair question, but a non-binding promise, even under oath.

[DeminPennswoods]

14. Big, long paper trail and previous job

in Bush 43 WH not to mention the stolen 2000 election.

[bigbrother05]

30. Yea, right after he worked for Ken Starr then for W

Funny how that worked out for him, "evolving" views.

[Freethinker65]

4. Self preservation is actually pretty smart

And the guy will be confirmed.

Possibility that Roberts could be swayed to indict if Trump continues on his path of disregarding laws and the legislature refuses to do its job.

But say goodbye to reproductive rights, fair voting laws, and hello to freedom to discriminate if you are Christian.

[DeminPennswoods]

5. Agree with your assessment

Kavanaugh has a long track record that will not be kind to him.

[UTUSN]

11. K&R

[3catwoman3]

12. His dumbest decision was...

...to run for president.

[33taw]

18. Agree.

[caballojm]

15. Dump can't make a recess appointment, can he?

[Calista241]

17. Technically he could, but i doubt Democrats will let him.

Roberts basically ruled that recesses have to be 3 days or longer, and Dems will gavel in pro-forma sessions to keep Trump from doing this.

The real risk is the Republican push this through in the lame duck session if they lose the Senate.

Collins and Murkowski may say they’re pro-choice, but they cannot get elected without Repub votes. If they cost the Republicans a seat on the court, there will be all kinds of hell to pay, even though they’re not up for election this term.

[czarjak]

16. He alone can fuck it up....

[3catwoman3]

21. That is for goddamned sure, and he is doing so.

One man wrecking crew.

[Stonepounder]

22. Or perhaps he made a 'can't lose' decision.

If Kavanaugh wins, Trump wins getting a Right-Wing majority on the court and can crow about it to his base.

If Kavanaugh loses, Trump wins because he can scapegoat the Rethug(s) who voted no and blame the Democrats and rile up his base, hoping to pick off one or more Red-State Dems, and perhaps also replacing a couple of moderate Rethugs with more right-wingers. And he is almost certain to be able to get his next nominee confirmed, one who will also be someone recommended by the Heritage Foundation.

[Hoyt]

27. Kav actually thinks Prezs CAN be indicted under current law, but thinks Congress should pass a law

specifically stating Impeachment is the process for a sitting Prez and they get some kind of diplomatic immunity for civil and criminal investigations and indictments until out of office.

Since, it's unlikely such a law will be passed anytime soon, or even apply in this case if it were, Kav is on record supporting indicting a sitting Prez. That's too our advantage, although I too believe a sitting Prez should have some kind of immunity while in office from many, but not all, civil and criminal acts. A Democratic Prez could be the victim of relatively minor civil or ciminal indictment (for example, caught smoking weed) someday.

Unless Congress passes a law, Kav would have a serious problem having previously said that a Prez can be indicted. Although, he's a GOPers, so who knows.

[marylandblue]

36. His article didn't really opine in current law

He just thinks Congress should make it clear that Presidents can't be investigated. But if he is on the SCOTUS, he can achieve the same result bimself without Congress.

[Hoyt]

38. If he wants Congress to clarify things, then he believes trump could be indicted now.

There was a great discussion on Maddow last night by some liberal attorneys.

Here's another article:

"Properly understood, Kavanaugh’s expressed views actually support the opposite conclusion: that the president can be investigated and maybe even indicted unless Congress passes a law saying he can’t — which Congress has not done."

"The key texts here Kavanaugh’s 2009 article in the Minnesota Law Review and his 1998 article in the Georgetown Law Journal. . . . . .

"Now comes the tricky part. In 2009, Kavanaugh proposed that Congress might pass a law that would protect the president from investigation and indictment while in office. That’s the part that some Democrats are focusing on now — because Kavanaugh was saying that he thought it was a bad idea to go after the president.

"But from a legal and constitutional perspective, Kavanaugh wasn’t saying that the courts should find that the president shouldn’t be investigated or indicted. To the contrary. He was saying that Congress should pass a law ensuring that result, because without it, the president was open to being investigated — and maybe even indicted. . . . . . . ."

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-10/supreme-court-brett-kavanaugh-doesn-t-give-president-trump-cover


To be sure, Kavanaugh could do a 180 if the case were presented to the Court, but he'd either have to dance or admit he's a liar, which probably wouldn't shame him.

I actually believe that sitting Presidents should be subject to Impeachment, and indictment for rape, murder, treason, assault, etc. However, I'm not sure they should be subject to civil and criminal cases of a lesser nature while in office. Their position is so important that some degree of diplomatic immunity makes sense. I'd love to see trump perp-walked for jaywalking or whatever, but it will trap a Democrat someday too.

[marylandblue]

39. Kavanaugh's article explicitly said current law was beyond the scope of his article

And he wanted to protect the President from ALL civil and criminal investigation except impeachment. Only Congress can prevent an investigation before it starts. The court would have to wait for a case to come to it, which would mean the President has already been subject to at least part of the burdensome investigation Kavanaugh wanted to prevent. If he's on the SCOTUS, he would be able to end the burden for the current President and protect all future Presidents from it. I don't think there is any real question about how he would decide. He will have the power, he will use it.

[Hoyt]

41. He said Congress needed to pass a law to ensure Prez cannot be indicted. Congress has not passed

such law.

What is interesting is that he said that in 2009 when Obama was Prez.

I don't like the jerk period, if for no other reason is that he obviously is OCD about his hair, but this is exactly what anyone should have expected when they stayed home in November 2016 in protest or not, voted for trump, wrote in candidates, voted third party, criticized Clinton, etc.

[Orsino]

28. No.

The choice was probably made for him, but anyhoo he'll get a Justice who'll stay out of his way.

[duforsure]

33. Probably his choice because

They have the most dirt on him to get him to vote as he wants or they use it against him.

[GoCubsGo]

37. It all reeks to high heaven.

I don't know if this is McConnell pulling a fast on Trump, or on us. If Kavanaugh doesn't get through confirmation, the next person will, because they are just not going to turn down two of them. The next pick could very well be the most heinous individual of the lot.