Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No...the Democrats are trying to smear him because Hillary lost in 2016. That’s the liberals fault for attacking this man. Senate Democrats have pushed the nation to the point there is no more impartiality. Democrats created this negative atmosphere on Capitol Hill.Yea ...he is impartialHe claims to be independent and impartial, yet he was selected for the SC by a far right special interest group specifically because he is NOT independent or impartialI guess it's as close as we'll get to an "I'm sorry" for all the disrespectful, flippant responses to questions and angry shouting at last week's hearing. Just remember, he's really impartial.
LOL
- I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge
Yes, I was emotional last Thursday. I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband and dad.
By
Brett M. Kavanaugh
Oct. 4, 2018 7:30 p.m. ET
I was deeply honored to stand at the White House July 9 with my wife, Ashley, and my daughters, Margaret and Liza, to accept President Trump’s nomination to succeed my former boss and mentor, Justice Anthony Kennedy, on the Supreme Court. My mom, Martha—one of the first women to serve as a Maryland prosecutor and trial judge, and my inspiration to become a lawyer—sat in the audience with my dad, Ed.
That night, I told the American people who I am and what I believe. I talked about my 28-year career as a lawyer, almost all of which has been in public service. I talked about my 12 years as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, often called the second most important court in the country, and my five years of service in the White House for President George W. Bush. I talked about my long record of advancing and promoting women, including as a judge—a majority of my 48 law clerks have been women—and as a longtime coach of girls’ basketball teams.
As I explained that night, a good judge must be an umpire—a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no political party, litigant or policy. As Justice Kennedy has stated, judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because the law and the Constitution compel the result. Over the past 12 years, I have ruled sometimes for the prosecution and sometimes for criminal defendants, sometimes for workers and sometimes for businesses, sometimes for environmentalists and sometimes for coal miners. In each case, I have followed the law. I do not decide cases based on personal or policy preferences. I am not a pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant judge. I am not a pro-prosecution or pro-defense judge. I am a pro-law judge.
As Justice Kennedy showed us, a judge must be independent, not swayed by public pressure. Our independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic. The Supreme Court is the last line of defense for the separation of powers, and for the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.
The Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution. The justices do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. They do not caucus in separate rooms. As I have said repeatedly, if confirmed to the court, I would be part of a team of nine, committed to deciding cases according to the Constitution and laws of the United States. I would always strive to be a team player.
During the confirmation process, I met with 65 senators and explained my approach to the law. I participated in more than 30 hours of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I submitted written answers to nearly 1,300 additional questions. I was grateful for the opportunity.
After all those meetings and after my initial hearing concluded, I was subjected to wrongful and sometimes vicious allegations. My time in high school and college, more than 30 years ago, has been ridiculously distorted. My wife and daughters have faced vile and violent threats.
Against that backdrop, I testified before the Judiciary Committee last Thursday to defend my family, my good name and my lifetime of public service. My hearing testimony was forceful and passionate. That is because I forcefully and passionately denied the allegation against me. At times, my testimony—both in my opening statement and in response to questions—reflected my overwhelming frustration at being wrongly accused, without corroboration, of horrible conduct completely contrary to my record and character. My statement and answers also reflected my deep distress at the unfairness of how this allegation has been handled.
I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said. I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.
Going forward, you can count on me to be the same kind of judge and person I have been for my entire 28-year legal career: hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good. As a judge, I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect. I have been known for my courtesy on and off the bench. I have not changed. I will continue to be the same kind of judge I have been for the last 12 years. And I will continue to contribute to our country as a coach, volunteer, and teacher. Every day I will try to be the best husband, dad, and friend I can be. I will remain optimistic, on the sunrise side of the mountain. I will continue to see the day that is coming, not the day that is gone.
I revere the Constitution. I believe that an independent and impartial judiciary is essential to our constitutional republic. If confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep an open mind in every case and always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the American rule of law.
Judge Kavanaugh has been nominated as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Appeared in the October 5, 2018, print edition.
Opinion | I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge
Even though the Clintons are out to get him
link?and one even came out today to say she was told WHAT to say and how to say it.No, there were several witnesses named by Fraud, one of whom is her friend, neither of whom corroborated her story.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
kinda of illegal, ya know?
Yeah, she made it up in 2012.There were ZERO witnesses because this shit never happened you loon.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.You guys have all been playing "lawyer" too long. I don't need fucking PROOF to comment on his behavior during the testimony. I already told you what I did and did NOT mean by it and if you ask me, you guys are all overreacting almost as much as Kavanaugh did. Stop the tears. I honestly don't like to see it.
Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
so you're as confused by google as people say...link?and one even came out today to say she was told WHAT to say and how to say it.No, there were several witnesses named by Fraud, one of whom is her friend, neither of whom corroborated her story.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
kinda of illegal, ya know?
were they installed for the primary purpose to save a president who might be indicted?He’s there because he’s spent his life participating in partisan conservative hackery, which is to the liking of the Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society, who put him on a list of names that Trump is allowed to choose from in exchange for their support.Hello liar, he has a history of following the constitution which is why he's there. Grow up.He claims to be independent and impartial, yet he was selected for the SC by a far right special interest group specifically because he is NOT independent or impartialI guess it's as close as we'll get to an "I'm sorry" for all the disrespectful, flippant responses to questions and angry shouting at last week's hearing. Just remember, he's really impartial.
LOL
- I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge
Yes, I was emotional last Thursday. I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband and dad.
By
Brett M. Kavanaugh
Oct. 4, 2018 7:30 p.m. ET
I was deeply honored to stand at the White House July 9 with my wife, Ashley, and my daughters, Margaret and Liza, to accept President Trump’s nomination to succeed my former boss and mentor, Justice Anthony Kennedy, on the Supreme Court. My mom, Martha—one of the first women to serve as a Maryland prosecutor and trial judge, and my inspiration to become a lawyer—sat in the audience with my dad, Ed.
That night, I told the American people who I am and what I believe. I talked about my 28-year career as a lawyer, almost all of which has been in public service. I talked about my 12 years as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, often called the second most important court in the country, and my five years of service in the White House for President George W. Bush. I talked about my long record of advancing and promoting women, including as a judge—a majority of my 48 law clerks have been women—and as a longtime coach of girls’ basketball teams.
As I explained that night, a good judge must be an umpire—a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no political party, litigant or policy. As Justice Kennedy has stated, judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because the law and the Constitution compel the result. Over the past 12 years, I have ruled sometimes for the prosecution and sometimes for criminal defendants, sometimes for workers and sometimes for businesses, sometimes for environmentalists and sometimes for coal miners. In each case, I have followed the law. I do not decide cases based on personal or policy preferences. I am not a pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant judge. I am not a pro-prosecution or pro-defense judge. I am a pro-law judge.
As Justice Kennedy showed us, a judge must be independent, not swayed by public pressure. Our independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic. The Supreme Court is the last line of defense for the separation of powers, and for the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.
The Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution. The justices do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. They do not caucus in separate rooms. As I have said repeatedly, if confirmed to the court, I would be part of a team of nine, committed to deciding cases according to the Constitution and laws of the United States. I would always strive to be a team player.
During the confirmation process, I met with 65 senators and explained my approach to the law. I participated in more than 30 hours of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I submitted written answers to nearly 1,300 additional questions. I was grateful for the opportunity.
After all those meetings and after my initial hearing concluded, I was subjected to wrongful and sometimes vicious allegations. My time in high school and college, more than 30 years ago, has been ridiculously distorted. My wife and daughters have faced vile and violent threats.
Against that backdrop, I testified before the Judiciary Committee last Thursday to defend my family, my good name and my lifetime of public service. My hearing testimony was forceful and passionate. That is because I forcefully and passionately denied the allegation against me. At times, my testimony—both in my opening statement and in response to questions—reflected my overwhelming frustration at being wrongly accused, without corroboration, of horrible conduct completely contrary to my record and character. My statement and answers also reflected my deep distress at the unfairness of how this allegation has been handled.
I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said. I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.
Going forward, you can count on me to be the same kind of judge and person I have been for my entire 28-year legal career: hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good. As a judge, I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect. I have been known for my courtesy on and off the bench. I have not changed. I will continue to be the same kind of judge I have been for the last 12 years. And I will continue to contribute to our country as a coach, volunteer, and teacher. Every day I will try to be the best husband, dad, and friend I can be. I will remain optimistic, on the sunrise side of the mountain. I will continue to see the day that is coming, not the day that is gone.
I revere the Constitution. I believe that an independent and impartial judiciary is essential to our constitutional republic. If confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep an open mind in every case and always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the American rule of law.
Judge Kavanaugh has been nominated as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Appeared in the October 5, 2018, print edition.
Opinion | I Am an Independent, Impartial Judge
How to Stop Lying
Because the Democrats have never appointed a partisan liberal. Lol! That is pretty funny.
No...it’s a sanity vs. insanity thread. Ford is a liberal California college professor. Therefore we know she is a political operative. Then after her testimony...I realized she was a bull goose looney insane person. Not a shred of believability to her story.This isn't a Kavanaugh is good/bad thread.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.You guys have all been playing "lawyer" too long. I don't need fucking PROOF to comment on his behavior during the testimony. I already told you what I did and did NOT mean by it and if you ask me, you guys are all overreacting almost as much as Kavanaugh did. Stop the tears. I honestly don't like to see it.3 points:
1. Kavanaugh was nominated to the DC Court of Appeals back in 2004, but got filibustered by the Dems and didn't get confirmed. Bush renominated him again in 2006, and after a difficult and bruising fight got confirmed that time. And yet there is no case or example that shows partiality by him against the Dems. There is no case where his decision was overturned by the SCOTUS. So when you say his deep disaffection for the Dems means he can't be impartial then I have to ask on what do you base that opinion on.
2. Not sure if he has actually said that the Democrats staged this whole thing to stop him, but Good Lord how can you blame him for thinking that? You don't see the timing of all these allegations and calls for investigations as somewhat suspect? You say you have eyes an common sense, but it does not appear that is the case. This has been one long delay and deny tactic on the part of the Democrats, which is fine but not when you set out ahead of time to viciously smear the reputation of a nominee for no other reason than political objectives. They had already said they would do anything to stop the confirmation of Trump's nominee no matter who it was.
3. "Happily he's sobered up". That's really low, OL. You got any reason to support your contention that he was under the influence of anything? No, you don't, and that is pretty reprehensible on your part.
Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.You guys have all been playing "lawyer" too long. I don't need fucking PROOF to comment on his behavior during the testimony. I already told you what I did and did NOT mean by it and if you ask me, you guys are all overreacting almost as much as Kavanaugh did. Stop the tears. I honestly don't like to see it.
Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
That was what the thread was for.
Paywall. Try copying and pasting it for us.so you're as confused by google as people say...link?and one even came out today to say she was told WHAT to say and how to say it.No, there were several witnesses named by Fraud, one of whom is her friend, neither of whom corroborated her story.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
kinda of illegal, ya know?
Friend of Dr. Ford Felt Pressure to Revisit Statement
is this where we call the wall street journal biased or a hack?
This is not about MY objectivity. His op ed is right there, first post. Read it and reply.as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
That was what the thread was for.
no. that would be illegal.Paywall. Try copying and pasting it for us.so you're as confused by google as people say...link?and one even came out today to say she was told WHAT to say and how to say it.No, there were several witnesses named by Fraud, one of whom is her friend, neither of whom corroborated her story.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
kinda of illegal, ya know?
Friend of Dr. Ford Felt Pressure to Revisit Statement
is this where we call the wall street journal biased or a hack?
Through psychotherapy hypnosis. Why didn’t she say something when Kavanaugh was up for Appellate Court? She sure as the fuck made it up and it fit nicely into her scrambled eggs brain and it’s memory recall.Yeah, she made it up in 2012.There were ZERO witnesses because this shit never happened you loon.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
He needs to sit on the High Court.This is not about MY objectivity. His op ed is right there, first post. Read it and reply.as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
That was what the thread was for.
She did make it up. Most likely she took LSD after downing a fifth of vodka.Yeah, she made it up in 2012.There were ZERO witnesses because this shit never happened you loon.There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
Needs to? Why does he NEED to?He needs to sit on the High Court.This is not about MY objectivity. His op ed is right there, first post. Read it and reply.as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
That was what the thread was for.
Because he is highly qualified.Needs to? Why does he NEED to?He needs to sit on the High Court.This is not about MY objectivity. His op ed is right there, first post. Read it and reply.as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?
That was what the thread was for.
LOL! Lordo stepped right into that one. Love it.He doesn't need to apologize for anything.
Unless he were to, say, be nominated for a high court position where political paranoia conspiracy theories and obvious bias would be obvious detriments.
But what are the chances of that happening. If that were going to be the case he would have had to write a disclaimer like the one quoted in the OP.
Oh wait........
But.....even then, he doesn't need to.
Obviously he thought he did, didn't he.
Would you say then that his judgment is poor?
His op ed insists he is fair minded and does not let politics interfere with his decisions. Do you feel that is possible now, after the treatment he and his family have received? Will that genuine emotion you all feel was so appropriate at his hearing disappear now? All that overwhelming frustration and that chagrin over the insults and threats to his wife and children? The embarrassment of his parents?He needs to sit on the High Court.This is not about MY objectivity. His op ed is right there, first post. Read it and reply.as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
That was what the thread was for.
Your thread title does not reflect a serious attempt to discuss Kavs impartiality, but rather to continue to paint him as an alcoholic, drunk lady.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?There were only two witnesses--Kavanaugh who of course would deny it, and his friend Mark Judge who said he does not recall it and wrote a book about his life at the time being full of black outs.Not one person corroborated Ford's story. So you don't believe in the American concept of justice, Innocent until proven guilty.I AM being honest; that is what I think. You don't agree, fine.Maybe you shouldn't throw shit around then. Cuz the wind direction can change. This isn't about playing at lawyering, this is about what's fair and honest. Which the Democrats have not been through this whole sad saga.
As with most sexual assaults, they don't happen in the view of many others. It's kind of illegal, you know?
That was what the thread was for.
so - kavanaugh has to "forgive" the left for "their" actions or he won't be able to be unbiased. hell this is even better. just act the fool and say he won't be able to judge you fairly cause you're a fool.His op ed insists he is fair minded and does not let politics interfere with his decisions. Do you feel that is possible now, after the treatment he and his family have received? Will that genuine emotion you all feel was so appropriate at his hearing disappear now? All that overwhelming frustration and that chagrin over the insults and threats to his wife and children? The embarrassment of his parents?He needs to sit on the High Court.This is not about MY objectivity. His op ed is right there, first post. Read it and reply.as your subject line so clearly stated how objective you are.Anyone want to speak to his ability to be impartial, now that he has admitted he crossed the line in his testimony?Blah, blah, blah. Answer my question, do you believe in the American concept of justice, innocent until proven guilty or not?
That was what the thread was for.
How does that evaporate?
