President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Yeah, but then YF started writing me, telling me your feelings were hurt.

 

Please do some research on this. Of all the silly, purposefully misleading knee-jerk talking points, this is the dumbest one.

 

YCQM

 

Posted as a matter of record.

 

The record is not supposed to be wrong.

 

Kavanaugh wrote this for the Minnesota Law Review in 2009.

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf

"The country wants the President to be 'one of us' who bears the same responsibilities of citizenship that all share. But I believe that the President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office."

Later in the article:

"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. Criminal investigations targeted at or revolving around a President are inevitably politicized by both their supporters and critics. As I have written before, 'no Attorney General or special counsel will have the necessary credibility to avoid the inevitable charges that he is politically motivated—whether in favor of the President or against him, depending on the individual leading the investigation and its results.' The indictment and trial of a sitting President, moreover, would cripple the federal government, rendering it unable to function with credibility in either the international or domestic arenas. Such an outcome would ill serve the public interest, especially in times of financial or national security crisis."

It must be noted that he wrote this in regards to the 44th President -- who, of course, was President Obama.

In this piece, Kavanaugh also argues to "ensure prompt Senate votes on executive and judicial nominations," "streamline executive-branch organization and ensure that officials in independent agencies are more accountable," and to "consider the possible benefits of a single, six-year Presidential term," among other points.

I would hope that some Senator would raise one particular point of Kavanaugh's -- that all judicial nominees should receive a Senate vote within 180 days -- and then refer to Merrick Garland.

 

I agree. I'd like to see something in the Senate rules, if not a constitutional amendment, that gives the Senate 180 days to reject a nomination - any nomination. Seeing people literally have their nominations for judicial posts, diplomatic posts, held up for years (often by a single Senator trying to gain leverage for something unrelated) is ridiculous.

 

Lol, is she feeling inadequate?

 

Anyone want to look up how long it took Kavanaugh to get a vote on his original nomination to the bench?

 

"“Am I a Republican?” Mr. Fitzgerald said. “What is a Republican anymore?"