‘America First’ SCOTUS Choice: Judge Brett Kavanaugh Applies Trump’s Economic Patriotism to the Law

Brietbart ^ | July 4, 2018 | John Binder

[familyop]

Judge Brett Kavanaugh, in the running to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy, appears to share President Trump’s views on immigration and protecting the American worker. In two dissenting opinions and one concurring opinion for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Kavanaugh sided with American citizens and U.S. industry over illegal aliens and foreign competitors — opinions that align to Trump’s “America First” approach to the U.S. economy, immigration, worker protections, and trade.

[fortheDeclaration]

Sounds good!

[familyop]

And while we're at it, see the post above this thread. It addresses another issue that we've been misled about by many trolls.

Empirical SCOTUS blog sees Brett Kavanaugh as likely SCOTUS nominee
ABA Journal, American Bar Association ^ | December 12, 2017 | Debra Cassens Weiss
Posted on 07/02/2018 7:05:47 PM PDT by familyop

Kavanaugh would be attractive to conservatives because of positions he took on two hot-button issues: gun rights and abortion. Kavanaugh dissented when the appeals court rejected a challenge to a Washington, D.C., ban on assault weapons enacted after the Supreme Court found an individual right to own guns under the Second Amendment. Kavanaugh also dissented when the full D.C. Circuit required the U.S. government to allow an abortion for a 17-year-old immigrant who was being held in a shelter because she is in the country illegally.

(Excerpt) Read more at abajournal.com ...

[familyop]

The conspiracy theory trolls have been harping much about the ancient Vince Foster case and some associated work that Kavanaugh did as a young man. The testimony that the trolls are misrepresenting came from a transsexual!

Free traitors, feminists and anti-Second-Amendment activists will do anything to try to stop a good appointment to the Supreme Court.

[SoConPubbie]

Free traitors, feminists and anti-Second-Amendment activists will do anything to try to stop a good appointment to the Supreme Court.

I hope you aren't talking about the freepers that are trying to get at the truth about all the nominees.

If you are, you need to dial back the rhetoric.

[familyop]

Logical information with references is good in regards any of the possible appointees.

[familyop]

I’m going to clarify that issue with a quote and reference. Need a few minutes here.

[familyop]

Here's one of the conspiracy theories.

There is something 'fishy' about one of Trump's potential Supreme Court nominees
American Thinker
By Allan J. Favish
June 28, 2018

Before Trump makes his decision, he should speak with Miguel Rodriguez,...Kavanaugh may have a record of judicial opinions demonstrating fidelity to the rule of law, the relevant facts, and the United States Constitution. But that is only his judicial opinions...Rodriguez went back to the U.S. attorney's office in Sacramento, where, following a gender identity change,...

Do you have any idea how offensive that kind of treachery against conservatives is to conservatives who don't live near the coasts? Kavanaugh was said to have led the investigation, but so was Rodriguez.

Association alone should not be used to imply guilt. There's not even any specific accusation that Kavanaugh did something wrong. Instead, guilt is simply implied repeatedly with fallacies.

And what motive would someone have for calling Kavanaugh's great record "only his judicial opinions?"

Vince Foster's death has been investigated five times. Records reveal evidence from the investigations, and others are claiming that the evidence is falsified.

Enough! Anyone using a tragedy caused in part by the Clinton Administration's toxic work environment to dishonestly implicate conservatives with nothing more than associations and implications is not helping conservatives.

And I really don't care about popularity contests and cults of personality. Such activities are also antithetical to conservatism and should be relegated to the hen house. I care about the facts, and only as logically presented. All else is lying, which is suspect.

[familyop]

Also see the furtive fallacy, one of many used by narcissists in conspiracy theories against the reputations of people like Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh did quite well with conservative work in support of our Constitution for a man in the middle of the Washington D.C. population, but some who push conspiracy tales also libeled him by associating him with those who worked around him and for him.

Many of us have been on the receiving end of slanders from affirmative action employees in our jobs and other situations and have had more than our fill of it. Men and traditional families don’t like seeing truly conservative possible Supreme Court nominees being dishonestly defamed, because that may lead to more decades of poor judicial treatment for us.

And the motive and preference behind the defamation has been made obvious to us. Enough feminism and social leftism against our constitutional rights. We won’t put up with it any more.

[fortheDeclaration]

Thanks! It seems no selection is going to please everyone.

[Yaelle]

Not too cool, calling people who question Kavenaugh’s lying in the Vince Foster death case (only an idiot thinks he committed suicide with that evidence) conspiracy theorists.

Read the transcript here http://www.fbicover-up.com/miguel-rodriguez.html and please focus on Patrick Knowlton;s testimony. Knowlton is not a transgender. He is a witness who stopped at Ft. Marcy Park to pee, that day. He was harassed and threatened RE giving his testimony. Read how Kavenaugh set him up in front of the grand jury.

What? Now you believe the Clintons never put inconvenient souls to rest to further their aims? And for some reason, Knowlton was pressured to lie for them, and that is excusable because of other things he’s done since???

Meaning, what, exactly? “it was a long time ago” and you can forgive him allowing the Clintons to get away with murder?

Conspiracy my butt. To not question Kavenaugh’s obvious lies re the Foster case, to not worry about having a Clinton toady on the Supreme Court, makes one a narrow minded ideologue.

[familyop]

"If you are, you need to dial back the rhetoric."

Thank you. That's a good personal direction in general--one that I had forgotten after some years away from writing. Going back to writing for a publication and avoiding discussions about articles might be a better way to go.

[Hugh the Scot]

There are “agents” here among us...

Just look at the fact that suddenly Kavenaugh is in all the headlines as the conservative (lol) choice.

The fact that the media declares him frontrunner is suspicious enough; and instantly the provocateurs come out calling names and smearing other Freepers for not falling in line... Hmm.

I don’t like Kavenaugh, and I don’t trust him to keep justice blind to money and power. Kethledge is my preferred choice, for reasons.

Ignore the obvious manipulators, tell the truth, and hold the line... It’s all we can do.

[Wuli]

I am not buying all the hyper promotion of Kavanaugh. His history is soldly in the Bush family stable. I smell a Trojan horse being hyper promoted as a gift to Trump. I’ve never know the Bushes to give Trump anything he either wanted or needed.

[Yaelle]

Thanks. I hate litmus tests too. I’d prefer a judge who understands #1 the constitutional LIMITS more than anything else on the Supreme Court.

And a judge who would knowingly lie to protect the guilty should not be in the top running for the Supreme Court. Conspiracy schmearacy. This guy lied to allow the Clintons to murder someone inconvenient.