Kavanaugh on Thursday said that his referring to views of legal scholars, and not his own views, in seeking to make the edits.
Just “writing for a friend”.
Kavsplainin’.
And I call bullshit.
This is the kind of “reasoning” that demeans all lawyers, and judges.
To which my response is, in the words of that great Republican, Fiorello LaGuardia, “No matter how thin you slice it, it’s still baloney.”
That is such a crock of shit (from Kavanagh - not you, Tierney).
Kavanaugh knows exactly how he feels about whether or not Roe was correctly decided. In fact, his refusal to answer the question tells us he doesn’t think it’s settled law, and therefore not correctly decided, otherwise he’d answer the question affirmatively.
Kavanaugh’s refusal to tell the country what he thinks about Roe is self-serving cowardice, and Feinstein, or someone on the committee, should tell him so.
Locker room talk, if you will.
Kavanaugh returned to his previous rhetoric that there was “precedent on precedent” reaffirming Roe, but wouldn’t say specifically whether he thought the case was correctly decided.
If Judge Kavanaugh were an honest and decent man, there would be nothing at all wrong for him to respond with something like: “You know, I personally don’t believe the case was technically decided correctly, but like I’ve stated, this is now settled law and has been for decades. I have no designs to overturn that decision. Thank you.”
If.
If Kavanaugh were honest, he’d admit he has every intention of overturning Roe.
And if Kavanaugh was a decent man, Trump never would have nominated him.
I don’t think he’s fooling anyone with these answers.
Bingo! Hence, all the dishonesty.
But he is giving cover to Collin and Murkowski to vote for him. They are all liars.
Collins has no cover for this. Her political career is over if she votes to confirm Kavanaugh and, by this point, I think even she knows this.
Perhaps we need a “settled” provision to the lifetime appointment, like a trap door under their chair so we can get rid of them when they are no longer cooperating. I can think of more than one vacancy we could create right now with that tool.
(I apologize for my childish daydreaming - is either that or hard liquor to get me through the day)
I view this kind of hearing as a “show trial,” but that doesn’t diminish its importance. In a “show trial,” the outcome is not the important thing – we know in advance what it will be. The important thing is the effect on the public.
Kavanaugh is like a lot of witnesses – he will never give the testimony you want him to give. The Dems are following classic impeachment strategy by focusing on evidence that contradicts his present testimony.
The purpose is to show the public that Kavanaugh is dishonest about important issues and that, by extension, the Republicans are corrupt for pretending to accept his testimony at face value. It’s all about November.
As others have noted, he never answered the question as to whether or not he believes it’s “settled law.” He has answered in a very lawyerly fashion, just as he has been trained to do. What a farce this hearing is…
I think the more important point is that his opinion implies that “Settled Law” has zero meaning at the Supreme Court level. Kavanaugh wrote "[Supreme] Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so.” I.e. it’s settled law only until the Supreme Court changes its opinion. Of course I doubt this will stop Sen. Collins from leaning on Kavanaugh’s assurances regarding “settled law” as an excuse to vote to confirm.
What a pile of BS!
Rhenquist and Scalia were on the court and disagreed with Roe, but the issue was settled, long before, unanimously. Disagreeing, doesn’t mean its not settled. Judges’ individual opinions are not sacrosanct and are not Law, not even on SCOTUS. This is commonly referred to as the Rule of Law and anyone who mealy mouths it is unqualified to sit on the Supreme Court.
He’s a greasy, lying little shitweasel.
He has not answered one fucking question. Either it’s hypothetical therefore he doesn’t feel comfortable without actual case notes on the topic, or it’s an actual case and he can’t comment on ongoing litigation.
The rest of the time he lies and slides around worse than a preacher in a whore house.