Chris Coons Calls Kavanaugh Partisan, Concedes Ruth Bader Ginsburg Is, Too

[Doc7505]

Chris Coons Calls Kavanaugh Partisan, Concedes Ruth Bader Ginsburg Is, Too​

Chris Coons Calls Kavanaugh Partisan, Concedes RBG Is, Too
Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware condemned Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s partisan comments Thursday after criticizing Judge Brett Kavanaugh for being too partisan himself.... “I really did have trouble with the partisan nature of his direct attack on Democrats broadly and the Democrats on the [Senate Judiciary] Committee in particular,” Coons said on “Fox and Friends.” “I think Judge Kavanaugh would have been better served leaving those arguments to his partisan defenders.” … “We are elected as politicians and we do at times attack each other from a partisan perspective,” Coons continued. “I don’t think a sitting judge should have come at us with quite that tone.” ... .
Anchor Brian Kilmeade confronted Coons with a statement Judge Ginsburg made in 2016 regarding President Donald Trump’s election:
I can’t imagine what this place would be – I can’t imagine what the country would be – with Donald Trump as our president. For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be – I don’t even want to contemplate that.
Brian Kilmeade asked Coons why he never expressed concern with her partisanship, compelling him to admit the inappropriateness of her remark.

~~~~~~
Hmm..., Senator Coons stepped in it. Unless Coons was camping out under a rock for the past two years, there is no way he could not know about RBGs partisan hack comments. Should she have been removed from the court for those statements? Coons et al have seemed to have missed that. They're either partisan hacks themselves or just useful idiots.
Judge Kavanaugh was defending himself, and the targets of his wrath were the people who were attacking him. They just all happened to be all DSA Democrats.
There's no doubt in the minds of Americans, that these attacks aimed at Kavanaugh went far beyond "Partisan". Judge Kavanaugh is not a partisan who is subject to those attacks. Coons and his fellow DSA Democrats made unsubstantiated, personal attack accusing him of criminal, amoral behavior.
Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows the Democrats were out to get Kavanaugh from the moment he was nominated. According to Coons Kavanaugh's crime was in telling the truth - something the SDA Democrats cannot abide.

Resubmitted to comply with Title Rules....

 

[theHawk]

Democrats calling someone else “too partisan”?

Even if he is, that’s just too bad. You all wanted it this hyper partisan crap, now you got it.

 

[playtime]

RBG hasn't gone off the rails with any CONspiracy bullshit. 'sour grapes' over the election & it's a clinton driven revenge thing?

wtf is that? i'll tell you what it is--- a man who hasn't the temperment or good judgement to do the job.

 

[task0778]

Coupla points:

1. Kavanaugh's record on the DC Court of Appeals does not reflect any partisanship. Didja know that in Emily’s List v. FEC (2009), Emily’s List, an organization that promotes abortion rights and supports pro-choice female Democratic candidates, challenged FEC regulations that placed restrictions on how nonprofit organizations could raise money and spend it in advocating for their cause. Judge Kavanaugh wrote the panel opinion ruling in favor of Emily’s List and striking down the regulations under the First Amendment—and holding several regulations to be invalid on statutory grounds as well.
This after being nominated in 2004 for the DC Court of Appeals and being filibustered by Senate Democrats for partisan reasons, based on his role in President George W. Bush’s administration. He was re-nominated and eventually confirmed in 2006, but not before being subjected to another round of intense partisan attacks. And yet he supports the 1st Amendment rights of an abortion rights group.


2. When Kavanaugh sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee just a week ago, he was not a sitting judge then but a defendant being accused of some pretty nasty stuff. Who among us wouldn't be justifiably outraged if we has been treated that way by the Democrats on that Committee? You saw the anger that Lindsay Graham displayed when he denounced his Democratic colleagues in that now famous and well-deserved tirade. Not the easiest situation to find yourself in, anybody want to step and say they woulda handled it any better. If you would then maybe you should walk a mile in his shoes and reflect on the allegations brought against him, ALL of them without substantive evidence.


3. People can say this and that, but what really counts with me is what people have said or not said about him since he entered public life some 25 years ago or so and went through his 1st FBI background check in 1993 I think. In all that time, NOBODY that worked with him has ever said a bad word about him. No charges of pussy grabbing, inappropriate remarks, etc. NOTHING. So what do we have here? A few unsupported accusations that have been investigated by the Senate and the FBI but nothing in the way of evidence was found.


Enough with the nonsense, IMHO the Dems have embarrassed themselves, their party, and the US Senate with this bullshit. It is past time to put this crap to bed and confirm this guy.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Brett Kavanaugh endured 31 hours of extremely hostile interrogation. The attacks on him grew so violent that security had to escort his daughters from a US government chamber. Judge Kavanaugh kept his cool. There is nothing wrong with his judicial temperment.