PDA

View Full Version : Brett Kavanaugh Sworn In As 114th Supreme Court Justice




DamianTV
10-06-2018, 07:03 PM
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-06/watch-live-senate-votes-confirm-kavinaugh


Update: The monthslong Kavanaugh confirmation saga has finally come to a close...he has been sworn in as the 114th Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.


BREAKING: Brett Kavanaugh is sworn in as 114th Supreme Court justice in private ceremony at court
— The Associated Press (@AP) October 6, 2018

Photos from the private ceremony haven't been released, but Kavanaugh showed up for the ceremony carrying a keg in a humorous gesture that will no doubt further enrage the left.


BREAKING:

First photos of Kavanaugh showing up in on the Supreme Court to be sworn in.

Just amazing. pic.twitter.com/siceA3rnIm
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) October 6, 2018

Though the White House did release a photo of Trump signing the commission appointing Kavanaugh to the Court.


NBC: White House releases photo of President Trump signing the commission appointing Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court pic.twitter.com/sfesorJEEE
— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) October 6, 2018

As protesters swarmed the Supreme Court and the Capitol, Trump tweeted to say that the crowd outside the Supreme Court building was "tiny" with "maybe 200 people".


The crowd in front of the U.S. Supreme Court is tiny, looks like about 200 people (& most are onlookers) - that wouldn’t even fill the first couple of rows of our Kansas Rally, or any of our Rallies for that matter! The Fake News Media tries to make it look sooo big, & it’s not!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 6, 2018

Chiming in from Egypt, First Lady Melania Trump answered a few questions about Christine Blasey Ford Kavanaugh's confirmation, saying she thinks Kavanaugh is "highly qualified."...all while standing in front of the Sphinx.


First Lady Melania Trump discusses Kavanaugh while on trip to Egypt: “I think he’s highly qualified for the Supreme Court. I’m glad Dr. Ford was heard, I’m glad that Judge Kavanaugh was heard," adding “I am against any type of abuse or violence” pic.twitter.com/V0XwAYWqne
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) October 6, 2018

* * *

The drama of Judge Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the US Supreme Court finally ended on Saturday afternoon, when without any last-minute surprises, the US Senate voted Kavanaugh to become the 114th Justice to the US Supreme Court in a major victory for both the Republican party and President Trump.

Kavanaugh was confirmed as expected in a 50-48 vote, the narrowest margin for any justice since the 19th century.

In a rare move, Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski was the only Republican senator to oppose Kavanaugh on Saturday, but she formally voted “present” to offset the absence of GOP Sen. Steve Daines who left Washington, D.C., on Friday to fly to Montana for his daughter’s wedding. West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, who is up for reelection in a state Trump won by more than 40 points in 2016, was the only Democratic senator to support Kavanaugh’s nomination.

As The Hill reports, republicans used Manchin’s support to tout Kavanaugh’s nomination as “bipartisan,” but the razor-thin vote margin marks the closest successful Supreme Court vote since Stanley Matthews was confirmed in a 24-23 vote in 1881.

...

Full article at link.

pcosmar
10-06-2018, 07:05 PM
At least that Circus is over..

Prepare for the increases in the Police State.

Swordsmyth
10-06-2018, 07:14 PM
RBG next.

CCTelander
10-06-2018, 07:28 PM
At least that Circus is over..

Prepare for the increases in the Police State.


Haven't you heard? According to many around here this is some sort of major victory for the cause of liberty. I'm sure we'll all feel a whole lot more free while languishing in some hellhole like Gitmo for our crimes against the state. Between waterboardings, of course.

dannno
10-06-2018, 07:32 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7St6Za4ieVs

Grandmastersexsay
10-06-2018, 07:34 PM
Photos from the private ceremony haven't been released, but Kavanaugh showed up for the ceremony carrying a keg in a humorous gesture that will no doubt further enrage the left.

That can't be true. It sounds like something from the onion. It would be awesome if he actually did that.

RonZeplin
10-06-2018, 08:11 PM
Grasley & Kavanaugh head off to the swearing in keg party.

Another passed out drunk like Ginsberg on the SCOTUS.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Do2tvPAV4AAR2Yl.jpg

CCTelander
10-06-2018, 08:14 PM
Grasley & Kavanaugh head off to the swearing in keg party.

Another passed out drunk like Ginsberg on the SCOTUS.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Do2tvPAV4AAR2Yl.jpg


ROTFL! I'd +rep you if I could.

Swordsmyth
10-06-2018, 10:32 PM
As pressure mounted on senators to vote for or against Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, one progressive magazine editor indicated she wanted to make the rest of Sen. Jeff Flake’s (R-Ariz.) life terrible if he voted in favor of the nominee.Annie Shields, who works as an editor at “The Nation” magazine, tweeted on Thursday that she was starting a Democratic Socialist group for people to continually harass Flake in public places.

I am starting a National @DemSocialists (https://twitter.com/DemSocialists?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) working group to follow Jeff Flake around to every restaurant, cafe, store, etc he goes to for the rest of his life and yell at him. https://t.co/8ry6Tj7VUA
— Annie Shields (@anastasiakeeley) October 4, 2018 (https://twitter.com/anastasiakeeley/status/1047930583777779714?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

“I am starting a National @DemSocialists working group to follow Jeff Flake around to every restaurant, cafe, store, etc he goes to for the rest of his life and yell at him,” she tweeted.
Her tweet was just the latest attempt to harass Flake, who notably delayed his vote on Kavanaugh after two women confronted him in an elevator.

More at: https://ijr.com/nation-editor-harass-sen-jeff-flake-forming-group/

Matt Collins
10-06-2018, 11:54 PM
Liberty just died a bit more today

Swordsmyth
10-06-2018, 11:56 PM
Liberty just died a bit more today

Actually it is a little healthier than before Kennedy retired.

nobody's_hero
10-07-2018, 06:51 AM
I find myself torn between the implications had Kavanaugh not been confirmed, versus the reality that he has been sworn in.

I suppose it doesn't really matter. No amount of the 10 of us b*tching at each other on Ron Paul forums would have had any effect on the outcome.

fisharmor
10-07-2018, 07:04 AM
Can someone explain why Rand voted for him?

Grandmastersexsay
10-07-2018, 07:13 AM
Can someone explain why Rand voted for him?

He probably thought it was more important to get a flawed conservative judge on now than a liberal judge later.

ILUVRP
10-07-2018, 07:17 AM
i would have voted for him if he would have passed a lie detector test , then we would have know who was telling the truth .

i doubt if he would have passed , flake should have put that in his demands .

tod evans
10-07-2018, 07:31 AM
i would have voted for him if he would have passed a lie detector test , then we would have know who was telling the truth .

i doubt if he would have passed , flake should have put that in his demands .

Sociopaths have no trouble passing a lie-detector...

Lawyers and government "authority" positions have a disproportionately high number of sociopaths in their midst...

Whether or not this high-ranking government functionary is a sociopath remains to be seen, they are after all extremely adept at hiding their true nature...

ThePaleoLibertarian
10-07-2018, 08:21 AM
Make no mistake, the Kavanaugh situation has not ended; it has only just begun. The last couple of years have shown us that when the left loses they double down, get angry and start trying to rally the mob. Kavanaugh and/or Senators who voted for his confirmation are going to be accosted in public. The idea that there's a rapist in the Supreme Court is going to be used as a propaganda tool against Republicans. Michael Avenatti probably isn't done trotting out the obvious liar Sweatneck, either. This show is still in early act three.

TheCount
10-07-2018, 08:47 AM
He probably thought it was more important to get a flawed conservative judge on now than a liberal judge later.

It's not as if Kavanaugh was the only conservative judge in the country. Trump could have nominated someone else off of the list.

specsaregood
10-07-2018, 08:59 AM
Can someone explain why Rand voted for him?

Randal posted why, way before the BS started.
https://www.facebook.com/SenatorRandPaul/posts/2033336106719182



After meeting Judge Kavanaugh and reviewing his record, I have decided to support his nomination.
No one will ever completely agree with a nominee (unless, of course, you are the nominee). Each nominee, however, must be judged on the totality of their views, character, and opinions.

I have expressed my concern over Judge Kavanaugh’s record on warrantless bulk collection of data and how that might apply to very important privacy cases before the Supreme Court.

In reviewing his record on other privacy cases like Jones, and through my conversation with him, I have hope that in light of the new precedent in Carpenter v. United States, Judge Kavanaugh will be more open to a Fourth Amendment that protects digital records and property.

Of course, my vote is not a single-issue vote, and much of my reading and conversation has been in trying to figure out exactly how good Judge Kavanaugh will be on other issues before the Court.

My conversation with Judge Kavanaugh reinforces my belief that he will evaluate cases before the Supreme Court from a textual and originalist point of view.
I believe he will carefully adhere to the Constitution and will take his job to protect individual liberty seriously.

On issues such as property rights and reining in the administrative state, Judge Kavanaugh has a strong record and showed a deep commitment during our meeting. His views on due process and mens rea show a thoughtful approach to the law and its applications. His views on war powers and separation of powers are encouraging.
Finally, his strong defenses of the First and Second Amendments in landmark cases show someone who isn’t afraid to challenge the status quo and will fight with backbone.

Judge Kavanaugh will have my support and my vote to confirm him to the Supreme Court.

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 09:14 AM
Can someone explain why Rand voted for him?
Because he is weak and didn't want to take the heat for standing on principle.

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 09:15 AM
Randal posted why, way before the BS started.
https://www.facebook.com/SenatorRandPaul/posts/2033336106719182
And that is patently absurd because there is zero way to hold a Justice accountable when confirmed. They can say whatever they like but there is no way to hold them to it. Looking at the guy's history it is obvious he doesn't care about the 4th Amendment. Kavanaugh is the swamp and the deep state.

ThePaleoLibertarian
10-07-2018, 09:24 AM
Because he is weak and didn't want to take the heat for standing on principle.
...Or because he didn't want to obliterate any political capital he might have had with the other Republicans in the Senate and the President himself. Going to the mat against Kavanaugh would be a bad strategic move.

Grandmastersexsay
10-07-2018, 09:36 AM
It's not as if Kavanaugh was the only conservative judge in the country. Trump could have nominated someone else off of the list.

I'm not defending Trump's nomination, I'm defending Rand choosing his battles. If he managed to stop the nomination, it is very possible his vote wouldn't matter on the next nominee, which could be from a Democrat administration.

spudea
10-07-2018, 09:38 AM
Because he is weak and didn't want to take the heat for standing on principle.

you are truly unsufferable. Mike lee also voted yes. Ted Cruz also voted yes. That makes all the senators that this forum has supported since 2007 voted yes. Rand is standing on principle.

spudea
10-07-2018, 09:40 AM
It's not as if Kavanaugh was the only conservative judge in the country. Trump could have nominated someone else off of the list.

You would find something else to complain about because no one has such impeccable ideological purity like you.

nikcers
10-07-2018, 10:29 AM
Because he is weak and didn't want to take the heat for standing on principle.

Spending political capital on standing for principles rather than advancing your principles and ideas is bad politics. I guess Rand Paul is a bad politician, which is not a bad thing in my eyes.

specsaregood
10-07-2018, 10:48 AM
I have some problems with Kavanaugh, but if Lee and Paul supported him, then I can only reason that his appointment was a positive thing. Hell, he answers to nobody anymore; perhaps he'll surprise on the positive side.

pcosmar
10-07-2018, 10:52 AM
It's not as if Kavanaugh was the only conservative judge in the country. Trump could have nominated someone else off of the list.

Or gotten another list.

The reality that there are worse judges does not really inspire confidence... as there are many better choices.

pcosmar
10-07-2018, 10:54 AM
I have some problems with Kavanaugh, but if Lee and Paul are supported him, then I can only reason that his appointment was a positive thing. Hell, he answers to nobody anymore; perhaps he'll surprise on the positive side.

A Liberty Sleeper... nice thought.

Like the current Clown in Chief,, I hope he does some good, even if accidentally.

Pauls' Revere
10-07-2018, 11:03 AM
And that is patently absurd because there is zero way to hold a Justice accountable when confirmed. They can say whatever they like but there is no way to hold them to it. Looking at the guy's history it is obvious he doesn't care about the 4th Amendment. Kavanaugh is the swamp and the deep state.

+ rep, spot on.

Anti Globalist
10-07-2018, 01:30 PM
Hopefully Kavanaugh changed his stance on the 4th amendment after all the crap he just went through but I doubt it.

dannno
10-07-2018, 02:02 PM
And that is patently absurd because there is zero way to hold a Justice accountable when confirmed. They can say whatever they like but there is no way to hold them to it. Looking at the guy's history it is obvious he doesn't care about the 4th Amendment. Kavanaugh is the swamp and the deep state.

Apparently it was due to his textualist stance, and since the texts have changed he sees it differently now.. and he is great on a lot of other issues.

So, very likely better than the judge he replaced.

dannno
10-07-2018, 02:03 PM
Hopefully Kavanaugh changed his stance on the 4th amendment after all the crap he just went through but I doubt it.

Allegedly it had less to do with his stance on the issue and more to do with how he believes law works.

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 02:54 PM
...Or because he didn't want to obliterate any political capital he might have had with the other Republicans in the Senate and the President himself. Going to the mat against Kavanaugh would be a bad strategic move.
Spending political capital on standing for principles rather than advancing your principles and ideas is bad politics. I guess Rand Paul is a bad politician, which is not a bad thing in my eyes.


So political expediency is more important than upholding the Constitution? :down:

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 02:55 PM
you are truly unsufferable. Mike lee also voted yes. Ted Cruz also voted yes. That makes all the senators that this forum has supported since 2007 voted yes. Rand is standing on principle.

I have some problems with Kavanaugh, but if Lee and Paul supported him, then I can only reason that his appointment was a positive thing.


Sorry, but logic fail:

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 02:56 PM
So, very likely better than the judge he replaced.He was unnecessary. Trump didn't even want him, but the deep state forced him.


Why not go with Mike Lee who would have had a very easy time passing nomination by comparison?

spudea
10-07-2018, 03:03 PM
He was unnecessary. Trump didn't even want him, but the deep state forced him.


Why not go with Mike Lee who would have had a very easy time passing nomination by comparison?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman

Only the purest person that passes your litmus test should be on the supreme court and if its anyone else we should abolish the USA and start over. Good call.

phill4paul
10-07-2018, 03:23 PM
I didn't get a chance to watch all the hearings so I missed this and perhaps others did too. I would think this is the reason that Rand changed his mins about Kavanaugh regarding the 4th amendment. Because it appears Kavanaugh had a change of mind.....


In this, my final post on Judge Kavanaugh's testimony, I focus on one issue that may prove the most important: his views on the Fourth Amendment. Having written an opinion suggesting that bulk data collection was constitutional, he insisted that the Carpenter case involving cell phone tower data was a "game changer." [My comment is in brackets.]

Day 3, Part III (2:01:07 – in response to Senator Pat Leahy on Kavanaugh's former opinion okaying the dragnet of phone recordings by the NSA, justifying it as a means to prevent terrorism):

The important I would say is I was trying to articulate what I thought was based on precedent at the time. At that time, when your information went to a third party, and the government obtained that information from the third party, the existing Supreme Court precedent was that your privacy interest was essentially zero. The opinion for the Supreme Court by Chief Justice Roberts this past spring, in the Carpenter case, is a game changer. And that's important. I talked repeatedly in this hearing about how technology will be one of the huge issues with the Fourth Amendment going forward. And you see Chief Justice Roberts' majority opinion in Carpenter that alters and really is a game changer from the precedent on which I was writing at that time.

[The claim that Carpenter was a game changer undermining the constitutionality of bulk data collection was made by Sharon Bradford Franklin in here article, Carpenter and the End of Bulk Surveillance of Americans, which is worth reading in its entirety. Franklin contends that:

Under Carpenter, the third-party doctrine does not extend to the type of collection conducted under the former Section 215 program, and that program would violate the Fourth Amendment. The bulk collection of call detail records, which show over time who calls whom and when, exposing intimate personal details and patterns of association, creates the same privacy risks as the cell site location information that is protected by the Fourth Amendment under Carpenter.

If this is what Judge Kavanaugh has in mind by "game changer," then this is potentially big.--REB]

Leahy then asks: "In light of Carpenter, do you believe that there is ever a situation where computing/tracking power becomes so pervasive that a warrant would be required?"

Two points. I also went on in [Jones] to say the attachment of the GPS device on the car was an invasion of the property right and that independently would be a Fourth Amendment problem. When the case went to the Supreme Court, the majority opinion for the Supreme Court followed that approach that I had articulated in saying that it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. So, the approach I had articulated there formed the basis of saying it was actually unconstitutional to install the device. I relied on that in the Silverman decision from 1961 and Justice Brennan's concurring opinion in the Knotts case in the 1970s. On your other point on technology and the phone that you held up, I do think the Supreme Court case law in the Riley case written by Chief Justice Roberts, and the Carpenter case, both majority opinions, both show his and the Court's recognition of the issue that you're describing, in that technology—it's made things different. And we need to understand those differences for purposes of applying Fourth Amendment law now. And I do think those two decisions are quite important as we move forward. And I think someone sitting in this chair ten years from now—I think that the question of technology on Fourth Amendment, First Amendment, war powers is going to be of central importance. […] I think Supreme Court case law is developing in a way consistent with your concern.

https://reason.com/volokh/2018/09/15/kavanaugh-testimony-part-6-on-the-fourth

nobody's_hero
10-07-2018, 03:32 PM
Because he is weak and didn't want to take the heat for standing on principle.

The real question is:

Did he shake the man's hand?

Swordsmyth
10-07-2018, 04:30 PM
Kavanaugh is an improvement over Kennedy, Rand had no way to make Trump pick someone better, Trump very well might have picked someone worse if Kavanaugh failed and Rand kept his allies happy with him.

It was the best outcome Rand could arrange.

If Matt doesn't like Rand's tactics he should run for office and show him how to do things better.

Swordsmyth
10-07-2018, 04:32 PM
i would have voted for him if he would have passed a lie detector test , then we would have know who was telling the truth .

i doubt if he would have passed , flake should have put that in his demands .

Lie detectors are no better than flipping a coin.

spudea
10-07-2018, 04:41 PM
I didn't get a chance to watch all the hearings so I missed this and perhaps others did too. I would think this is the reason that Rand changed his mins about Kavanaugh regarding the 4th amendment. Because it appears Kavanaugh had a change of mind.....



https://reason.com/volokh/2018/09/15/kavanaugh-testimony-part-6-on-the-fourth

Very nice points. Allow me to channel Matt Collins with the following: orange man bad therefore Brett Kavanaugh bad, therefore Rand Paul and Mike Lee bad, Kavanaugh was just saying whatever senators wanted so he would be confirmed, there is no way to hold him accountable to these words on the 4th amendment blah blah blah etc. etc.

georgiaboy
10-07-2018, 04:48 PM
I'm still standing with Rand.

I reckoned Roberts was gonna be awesome and then he let Obamacare go forward to my forever dismay.

This guy is about as good as I could expect given where we are.

RJB
10-07-2018, 04:48 PM
I didn't get a chance to watch all the hearings so I missed this and perhaps others did too. I would think this is the reason that Rand changed his mins about Kavanaugh regarding the 4th amendment. Because it appears Kavanaugh had a change of mind.....



https://reason.com/volokh/2018/09/15/kavanaugh-testimony-part-6-on-the-fourth
With the 99% circus over this nomination, this article was an odd gem discussing actual policy. Thanks.

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 04:57 PM
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman

Only the purest person that passes your litmus test should be on the supreme court and if its anyone else we should abolish the USA and start over. Good call.Incorrect. I am not looking for perfection. But someone who is appointed to the SCOTUS should at least follow the Constitution which Kavanaugh has demonstrated many times he is unwilling to do.

Matt Collins
10-07-2018, 04:59 PM
Kavanaugh is an improvement over Kennedy, Rand had no way to make Trump pick someone better, Wrong. With margins so thin it is possible Rand could have gone to Trump early and said "here is a list of people I won't vote for" and Trump would have had to have given at least a bit of attention to it.

Swordsmyth
10-07-2018, 05:10 PM
Wrong. With margins so thin it is possible Rand could have gone to Trump early and said "here is a list of people I won't vote for" and Trump would have had to have given at least a bit of attention to it.

How do you know he didn't?

nikcers
10-07-2018, 07:57 PM
So political expediency is more important than upholding the Constitution? :down:

If Rand can build a political coalition to restore the fourth amendment that is already gone then maybe we can talk about the constituion. Rand tried to oppose Trump during the 2016 election and the media and Trump shit on him and no one even spoke up to defend him. Trump threatened to run a counter campaign to his 2016 re-election so he wouldn't even have a seat at the table.

So while Rand hasn't moved the earth yet he has advanced healthcare buying groups and legalizing better treatment options for opioid addiction. He has advanced the ideas of a non interventionist foreign policy just by speaking out and saying that Trump should keep his word and have the foreign policy that he ran on, friendly fire is only allowed when you are not political opposition otherwise the Trump supporters would of attacked Rand Paul for it and went more in the direction of the John Bolton than Rand Paul.

fisharmor
10-07-2018, 07:58 PM
...Or because he didn't want to obliterate any political capital he might have had with the other Republicans in the Senate and the President himself. Going to the mat against Kavanaugh would be a bad strategic move.

I don't consider crossing party lines and then getting the sum of national attention to talk about the 4th amendment to be a bad deal at all.
Just more proof that the accumulation of political capital is its own end with you people.
Collect all the capital you want... if you never spend it, and pretend like the best possible times to do so aren't the right times, then some of us don't give a flying fuck how much political capital anyone has.

Swordsmyth
10-07-2018, 08:18 PM
I don't consider crossing party lines and then getting the sum of national attention to talk about the 4th amendment to be a bad deal at all.
Just more proof that the accumulation of political capital is its own end with you people.
Collect all the capital you want... if you never spend it, and pretend like the best possible times to do so aren't the right times, then some of us don't give a flying $#@! how much political capital anyone has.
This was not the best possible time to spend it.

Aratus
10-07-2018, 10:16 PM
Incorrect. I am not looking for perfection. But someone who is appointed to the SCOTUS should at least follow the Constitution which Kavanaugh has demonstrated many times he is unwilling to do.

Matt is correct. Kavanaugh might have gotten good grades at Yale, but he only was a law clerk
before he was tapped for the federal judge position by the "W" and if he has selective memory
gaps or even a lack of basic knowledge, he is in an Olympian realm where he is disaster prone.

Swordsmyth
10-07-2018, 10:28 PM
https://i0.wp.com/truepundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/emily-g-thread-768x935.png?resize=340%2C414&ssl=1

Swordsmyth
10-07-2018, 10:40 PM
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) faced a torrent of death threats and abuse on Twitter following her declaration that she would vote to confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, and her remarks in defense of the presumption of innocence. So far, Twitter has taken no action, allowing the threats against a sitting Senator to remain on the platform. Multiple Twitter users said they wished to “punch” Sen. Collins.

I want to punch @SenatorCollins (https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) in the face. #SenateIntelHearings (https://twitter.com/hashtag/SenateIntelHearings?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) #ComeyTestimony (https://twitter.com/hashtag/ComeyTestimony?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) #ComeyHearing (https://twitter.com/hashtag/ComeyHearing?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) #ComeyDay (https://twitter.com/hashtag/ComeyDay?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) #Comey (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Comey?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
— Liberal O'Leprechaun (@millerjr99) June 8, 2017 (https://twitter.com/millerjr99/status/872836744563101697?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

Am I the only one who wants to punch @SenatorCollins (https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) in the face right now? She sounds SO condescending!!! #voteherout (https://twitter.com/hashtag/voteherout?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
— KMO (@kitkatesq) October 5, 2018 (https://twitter.com/kitkatesq/status/1048291419985727489?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

I am also. I want to punch Collins
— Terri Hayes (@southNC) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/southNC/status/1048455858890465280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
At least one tweeter called for her death.

I hope someone kills you.
— Lawrence Farmer (@BigMikeFarmer) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/BigMikeFarmer/status/1048461772988895234?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Another told the Senator to kill herself.

@SenatorCollins (https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) your are a traitor and a p.o.s. You have sold out every women in the country. If only you were capable of shame maybe you would kill your horrible self. You don't deserve to call yourself a representative of anyone. Shame on you
— Austin Caylor (@Austioferocious) October 5, 2018 (https://twitter.com/Austioferocious/status/1048339581999828992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
Others simply bombarded Sen. Collins with abuse.

I won't mourn your death.
— Vincent Adultman (@wool_potatoes) October 5, 2018 (https://twitter.com/wool_potatoes/status/1048338554911449089?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

If @StephenKing (https://twitter.com/StephenKing?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) wouldn’t mind, it would make me feel a little better if he’d write a novella where @SenatorCollins (https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) dies a long slow horrible death.
Maybe there can be beer. Or prep school boys. #VoteHerOut (https://twitter.com/hashtag/VoteHerOut?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)
— Bronwyn Joye (@BronwynJoye) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/BronwynJoye/status/1048396367721316352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

.@SenatorCollins (https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) hand in ur vagina. U rnot welcomed member of female gender.
— Cydney.d (@dCydney) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/dCydney/status/1048620495644626944?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

Smelly, smelly GOP cunt
— Shelly (@shmadge) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/shmadge/status/1048609490637996032?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

@SenatorCollins (https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw) is a feckless cunt who has determined her legacy as a supporter of sexual predators and voted her party of hate over truth and justice. May she rot in hell
— Harlan (@HarlanDG) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/HarlanDG/status/1048600146064199680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

filthy bought cunt bitch.
— JSE (@JSException) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/JSException/status/1048595632028602369?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

Relinquish your vagina. Bitch.
— Donna Rogers (@DonnaRo29566978) October 6, 2018 (https://twitter.com/DonnaRo29566978/status/1048576389346148352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)



More at: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/06/sen-collins-flooded-with-abusive-tweets-threatening-death-violence-twitter-does-nothing/

otherone
10-07-2018, 11:00 PM
NEWS FLASH:
White Knightism doesn't get you laid.

nikcers
10-08-2018, 12:01 AM
Hopefully Kavanaugh changed his stance on the 4th amendment after all the crap he just went through but I doubt it.

https://i.imgur.com/X3gkaqL.jpg

timosman
10-08-2018, 12:12 AM
NEWS FLASH:
White Knightism doesn't get you laid.

https://i.imgflip.com/zclj5.jpg

Matt Collins
10-08-2018, 08:51 AM
If Rand can build a political coalition to restore the fourth amendment that is already gone then maybe we can talk about the constituion. Rand tried to oppose Trump during the 2016 election and the media and Trump shit on him and no one even spoke up to defend him. Trump threatened to run a counter campaign to his 2016 re-election so he wouldn't even have a seat at the table.
You don't want a seat at the table, you want to dominate the political environment.

And what you are advocating is "I must abandon the free market in order to save it"

goldenequity
10-08-2018, 10:33 AM
I have to agree with Kavanaugh.
In essence he is defending this position:
'We the People' are a National Security Risk.
I hope to God we are... more than ever. and growing.

nobody's_hero
10-08-2018, 11:11 AM
This was not the best possible time to spend it.

Indeed. Suppose the democrats had managed to drag this out past election day, retaken a majority (I don't think it's likely, but . . ), and put someone in place of Kavanaugh who was 10x worse. And Rand Paul was a deciding vote in a 50/50 split.

If only we could do more to support our few liberty candidates in D.C. other than setting up swords for them to fall on.

nikcers
10-08-2018, 09:49 PM
You don't want a seat at the table, you want to dominate the political environment.

And what you are advocating is "I must abandon the free market in order to save it"
That's a false equivalence. What I was advocating for is for the liberty movement to make the fourth amendment part of the Republican platform but we didn't win that argument but the argument isn't over Rand is still advocating for this change but he is not going to kamikaze his political career in order to make arguments that fall on deaf ears, Rand can't convince people we need the fourth amendment by himself and people won't take him seriously and won't trust him if people who claim to support him don't take him seriously and claim he sold out and isn't doing the right things.

I would say you are advocating for Rand to become the sole political opposition to this police state takeover when his own political party doesn't agree with him so they won't support it. Rand has been the number one defender of the fourth amendment. When they polled the Republican party on this issue in 2016 we were in the minority. This happened during the debates when he had that back and fourth moment with Chris Christie.

AZJoe
10-09-2018, 08:03 AM
Satire (https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-we-may-have-lost-the-scotus-seat-but-at-least-we-kept-our-dignity)Dems: 'We May Have Lost The SCOTUS Seat, But At Least We Kept Our Dignity' (https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-we-may-have-lost-the-scotus-seat-but-at-least-we-kept-our-dignity)

https://babylonbee.com/img/articles/article-3141-1.jpg


U.S.—Democratic leaders consoled themselves from their failure to stop Brett Kavanaugh... by reminding the nation that although they lost the SCOTUS seat, they were able to keep their dignity.

As liberal protesters banged on the doors of the Supreme Court and attempted to claw them open, Senate Democrats calmed their constituents by pointing out that they were able to be the bigger person in all this.

"At very least, we didn't drag our political process to new depths and make ourselves look like petulant children," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. ... "We could have tried to utterly destroy a man's life and turn to increasingly transparent obstruction tactics ... We could have screamed and cried when it looked like things weren't going to go our way ... We ... showed ourselves to be the mature ones." ...

Matt Collins
10-09-2018, 09:17 AM
What I was advocating for is for the liberty movement to make the fourth amendment part of the Republican platform but we didn't win that argument but the argument isn't over Rand is still advocating for this change but he is not going to kamikaze his political career in order to make arguments that fall on deaf ears, 1- the GOP platform means nothing. 2- Taking a principled stand isn't going to kamikazi his career if he does it right.



Rand can't convince people we need the fourth amendment by himself and people won't take him seriously and won't trust him if people who claim to support him don't take him seriously and claim he sold out and isn't doing the right things. No one is trying to convince anyone of anything. Rand just simply needed to explain his position and ride out the storm. But he was weak and didn't want to withstand the pressure when it mattered.


I would say you are advocating for Rand to become the sole political opposition to this police state takeover when his own political party doesn't agree with him so they won't support it. Rand has been the number one defender of the fourth amendment. When they polled the Republican party on this issue in 2016 we were in the minority. This happened during the debates when he had that back and fourth moment with Chris Christie.Principle is about doing what is right, not what is popular.