Kavanaugh and the Separations of Power,

[Penelope]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

 

[BluesLegend]

We don't give a shit who the left want on the SC. You got your two lesbo's on the court now its our turn.

 

[caddo kid]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

I view Kavanaughs previous rulings re: the DC appeals court & his writings as extremely right leaning; even bordering on support for authoritarian causes.

I can understand why Trump would pick such a judge as Kavanaugh; to bolster a SCOTUS that is right leaning, and potentially preparing for a 1930s style Germany.

We are living in dangerous times, when we have the intertwined helix of the GOP & the religious right.
This is a recipe for disaster.

Just ask anyone that may have lived in Germany during WWII that may have survived to this date.
I believe they would agree more so than disagree.

 

[Correll]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

 

[Penelope]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

 

[Penelope]

We don't give a shit who the left want on the SC. You got your two lesbo's on the court now its our turn.

You are a right winger, the right wingers that responded to the post were pro the Separation of Powers, I have to assume you want a dictator.

 

[Correll]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

Certainly not. YOu found something you consider is a strong point, you post it.



What did you do? Post the intro? That's great. Very informative.

 

[Correll]

We don't give a shit who the left want on the SC. You got your two lesbo's on the court now its our turn.

You are a right winger, the right wingers that responded to the post were pro the Separation of Powers, I have to assume you want a dictator.

You have not given any connection between what he said, and your conclusion.

 

[Crixus]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

This will be tough for you when Kavanaugh is seated.

 

[BluesLegend]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

You realize there are 9 SC justices, your fear mongering is weak.

 

[Penelope]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

You realize there are 9 SC justices, your fear mongering is weak.

and you want one that wants a dictator and thinks the Potus is above the law. You are aware there are other judges in the US, don't you?

 

[Correll]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

You realize there are 9 SC justices, your fear mongering is weak.

and you want one that wants a dictator and thinks the Potus is above the law.

Explain your hysterical rants, or stop making them.

 

[BluesLegend]

We don't give a shit who the left want on the SC. You got your two lesbo's on the court now its our turn.

You are a right winger, the right wingers that responded to the post were pro the Separation of Powers, I have to assume you want a dictator.

Right, I want a dictator are you fucking stupid? Good grief the left are off the deep end. I am a conservative who supports the constitution and rule of law. I realize that's like acid rain to the left.

 

[Penelope]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

This will be tough for you when Kavanaugh is seated.

So you are pro a dictator, you must realize the next potus will probably be a Democrat, its like be careful what you ask for.

 

[Crixus]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

This will be tough for you when Kavanaugh is seated.

So you are pro a dictator, you must realize the next potus will probably be a Democrat, its like be careful what you ask for.

I don’t care who is or isn’t in power. They are all the same trash.

 

[BluesLegend]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

You realize there are 9 SC justices, your fear mongering is weak.

and you want one that wants a dictator and thinks the Potus is above the law. You are aware there are other judges in the US, don't you?

You are lying, pathetic.

 

[Penelope]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

This will be tough for you when Kavanaugh is seated.

No. Tough for all of us. We will then have a mole on the SC. If you want a to live under a King go to NK. Seems Trump is in love with Kim.

 

[Penelope]

1. PROVIDE SITTING PRESIDENTS WITH A TEMPORARY DEFERRAL OF CIVIL SUITS AND OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND INVESTIGATIONS


2. ENSURE PROMPT SENATE VOTES ON EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS



3. STREAMLINE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ORGANIZATION AND ENSURE THAT OFFICIALS IN INDEPENDENT AGENCIES ARE MORE ACCOUNTABLE


4. RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES HAVE LEGITIMATE AND SOMETIMES OVERLAPPING ROLES IN WAR AND NATIONAL SECURITY


5. CONSIDER THE POSSIBLE BENEFITS OF A SINGLE, SIX-YEAR PRESIDENTIAL TERM


(This Article is adapted from remarks I made at the University of Minnesota Law School on October 17, 2008—about two weeks before the presidential election.)

http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Kavanaugh_MLR.pdf
(of course you have to read it to really see what he thinks)
------------------------------------------------------------
Two other articles follow.

I believe in a strong Separation of Powers , when I questioned , it seemed that ultra and right wingers also agreed on the Separation of Powers, save oddball who was anti government all together, or I'm thinking he was. But Billy K, dspahn, night-son, and Eagle were pro Separation of Powers. (as evidenced by this thread: Are you for Separation of power, why and why not? )

Therefore Kavanaugh is not someone we should want on the SC, no matter of the outcome of the investigation.

I believe he wrote this article for someone like Trump who wants extreme power and he wrote it for a man who one day would latch on to his views and put him on the SC.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/for-brett-kavanaugh-the-separation-of-powers-is-a-one-way-street/

Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power

Nothing in your post supports your conclusion.

I have to assume you never read the articles I linked.

You realize there are 9 SC justices, your fear mongering is weak.

and you want one that wants a dictator and thinks the Potus is above the law. You are aware there are other judges in the US, don't you?

You are lying, pathetic.

About what. I didn't write that, Kav did. Now what am I lying about????????????

 

[Penelope]

We don't give a shit who the left want on the SC. You got your two lesbo's on the court now its our turn.

You are a right winger, the right wingers that responded to the post were pro the Separation of Powers, I have to assume you want a dictator.

Right, I want a dictator are you fucking stupid? Good grief the left are off the deep end. I am a conservative who supports the constitution and rule of law. I realize that's like acid rain to the left.

Obviously you do if you want Kav on the bench. He is looking to change amendments. Oh, you didn't read his article , did you? Tsh Tsh.

 

[Windparadox]

No. Tough for all of us. We will then have a mole on the SC. If you want a to live under a King go to NK. Seems Trump is in love with Kim.

`
I hope Putin isn't jealous. Maybe they can make it a ménage à trois .