Did Gorsuch and Kavanaugh lie?

[BackAgain]

The Dred Scott case was where a white and his slave Black from a slavery state, went to a free state and wanted to then return to the slave state with the Black remaining a slave.

Obviously slavery is wrong, but the court did not have to rule on that and change any precedent.
The point of law the SCOTUS failed on was that the slave state jurisdiction did not extend over the free state, so then Dred Scott could not then be legally forced back to the slave state.
The precedent the court violated was to allow one state to over ride another state both in law and jurisdiction.

And you are also totally wrong about abortion.
The right to life does NOT allow for anyone to have precedence over anyone one else.
If you need a transfusion to live, you can NOT demand it from anyone else.
The right to life means the right to be left alone, NOT to force a woman to carry and give birth.
That is infinitely beyond the "right to life" and totally illegal.

I know what the Dred Scott case was about. And I like your spin on how to evade the point. But it’s still a fail.

And you also fail in your pathetic effort to claim that I’m wrong about the abortion matter. The right to life absolutely DOES come as the preeminent right. You have a right to vote but you cannot vote (legally) if you’re dead. You have a right to free speech, but the dead can’t speak. You have a right to a trial when charged with a crime, but you don’t get a trial if you’re already dead. You have a right to the free exercise of your own religion, but you can’t worship in a coffin.

There will always be a competition between some tights and there will also always be a prioritization of some competing rights. And since there are no rights at all for the dead, the right to life itself is the highest one.

Can that be debated? I guess. But the debate is a fool’s errand.

 

[beautress]

I don't think Kavanaugh lied. The people closest to him described his actual character as thoughtful of both men and women, and that he never to their knowledge ever abused any woman whatsoever. The little dolly who brought the fake charges ensnared herself into several blatant lies in her testamony, not to mention her lie about not being a Democrat operative where the down low to the ground truth is. She was teaching her students how to pass lie detector tests with mind games, and she could pass lie detectors first before she taught others her little framework of knowledge. She was paid $800,000 for her lying ass testimony to destroy Brett Kavanaugh by taking advantage of his fondness for having a pleasure for drink now and then, and 3 of the people she claimed "witnessed" her alleged sorrows did not have a clue of remembrance of either the night she claimed all of them were together at the same time. What in the hell were Nancy Pelosi, Chuckie Schumer and Diane Feinstein thinking when they posed this poseur into lying her fat ass off against a respected scholar who is married and has a family? The Democrats will destroy a person who is good and true to the Constitution if they think he is a threat to communizing America to their damn liking. The thought of watching all those acts and procedures on live television makes me sick to my stomach because I remember the looks on every face that was lying against an innocent man just because he was once a Republican. He is now an American Justice on the Supreme Court, and he doesn't rule by asking the Republican or the Democrat party for their skewed view, he takes issues he must rule on to his own conscience like Supreme Court Justices are supposed to do.

I'm sick of the Democrats lying over and over and over and over about the same thing year in and year out. And their press purchases, who used to be fair human beings sure are wearing fancy clothes these days. Pay must be real good for Newspapers who do what George Soros favorites are doing after helping him achieve enviable wealth to control millions of people.

 

[beautress]

The Dred Scott case was where a white and his slave Black from a slavery state, went to a free state and wanted to then return to the slave state with the Black remaining a slave.

Obviously slavery is wrong, but the court did not have to rule on that and change any precedent.
The point of law the SCOTUS failed on was that the slave state jurisdiction did not extend over the free state, so then Dred Scott could not then be legally forced back to the slave state.
The precedent the court violated was to allow one state to over ride another state both in law and jurisdiction.

And you are also totally wrong about abortion.
The right to life does NOT allow for anyone to have precedence over anyone one else.
If you need a transfusion to live, you can NOT demand it from anyone else.
The right to life means the right to be left alone, NOT to force a woman to carry and give birth.
That is infinitely beyond the "right to life" and totally illegal.

Murder is illegal, sweetie.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is illegal for nominees to lie while testifying under oath before congress.

Be VERY specific and link to either under oath saying they would not vote against ANY case or law.

 

[bodecea]

It is illegal for nominees to lie while testifying under oath before congress.

It's something that endears them to the Right.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You do know that Justices grow and mature once on the court, right?

What a stupid attempt. Yeah,Kavanaugh "evolved" in 2 years despite hearing no arguments or cases or writing any decisions on roe v wade. You guys are absolutely shameless and will say anything, no matter how obviously stupid it is.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Be VERY specific and link to either under oath saying they would not vote against ANY case or law.

Why are you embarrassing yourself like this? You are perfectly happy that they misled the senate and the public. Why embarrass yourself with such an idiotic defense against something you full support? Bizarre behavior.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It's something that endears them to the Right.

perhaps since others can not you can link to them saying they would not vote for or against any law before them?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They should have refused to answer the questions and turned them back on the Senators with a simple, "I will not say how I will rule on any given subject, Senator. You should know and respect that". To preserve the independence and integrity of the court, no nominee should ever say how they will vote on anything.

They did do that. Pay attention! Then they were asked on their thoughts on roe and Casey.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Why are you embarrassing yourself like this? You are perfectly happy that they misled the senate and the public. Why embarrass yourself with such an idiotic defense against something you full support? Bizarre behavior.

So you can not I thought so,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So you can not I thought so,

So embarrassing and childish. They misled the senate and the public. And you are glad they did. So your behavior is bizarre.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Susan Collins Can’t Believe The Two Anti-Abortion Justices She Voted For Are Gutting Roe

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) is very surprised that the conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court that she helped entrench is on the cusp of killing Roe v. Wade.

talkingpointsmemo.com

“If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office,” Collins said in her statement. Wow.... You mean they suckered you into voting for them? Damn lady....

View attachment 640299

Collins got conned by the Grifter-in-Chief.

 

[beautress]

Here's a question: So what if they did lie? What can be done to them. Theirs are lifetime appointments.

They can be impeached, but who out there has the political will—not to mention the votes—to remove even one sitting Justice, much less three?

The evidence does not show a lie took place. The trouble with 30-year-old claims is that a lot of junk gets thrown into the fray, and it's not very likely the alleged even even took place when dirty politics are at their peak, and the peaker is a party main operative who gets $800,000 for the lie 30 years after she didn't experience it, but just wants to ditch somebody who has a tie to her hated political adversaries. What better grounds does a known liar have to run on that a sprint back in time to something nobody else recalls who was there on the night of the alleged lie took place. And not all the American people bought the farm of Christine Blasey-Ford's cesspool of blatant lies.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oh...the 2nd Amendment is being overturned, is it? Nice attempt at derailing this thread, tho.

2A stands because Nazi Gorsuch was kept from SCOTUS

 

[westwall]

They were under oath. I hope that it's passed on that you have no problem lying under oath.

Your people do it all of the time. Suck it up buttercup.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your people do it all of the time. Suck it up buttercup.

So you're saying it's fine.

 

[gipper]

Collins got conned by the Grifter-in-Chief.

Obama?

 

[hadit]

What a stupid attempt. Yeah,Kavanaugh "evolved" in 2 years despite hearing no arguments or cases or writing any decisions on roe v wade. You guys are absolutely shameless and will say anything, no matter how obviously stupid it is.

Obviously, you've never had a conversation with RW.

It just goes to show how stupid it is to try to pin a Justice down on how they'll vote on any given subject. They're supposed to be independent, not political, but that ship sailed on the left long ago.

 

[hadit]

They did do that. Pay attention! Then they were asked on their thoughts on roe and Casey.

Which was just another attempt to pin them down on how they'd vote, to give the usual suspects (you know who you are) ammo to shriek and moan about how they lied, it's not fair, reasons and stuff, etc.

 

[Mashmont]

Your racism negates anything useful you might ever say.

Racism? How so? All we heard about was her race. That's what she was known for, and it was why she was picked.