Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Pence Believe the American People are Naive... Are They?

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, left, President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, and Vice President Pence at the Capitol on Tuesday. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg News)

Vice President Pence said Tuesday that while he would personally like to see the Supreme Court one day overturn its landmark 1973 ruling legalizing abortion, neither he nor President Trump has discussed the issue with Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett M. Kavanaugh

Right. Given everything we know about Pence and Trump, and the Evangelical's strong influence on both, only the very naive will actually  believe the issue has not been dicussed. Conservative religionists have been dreaming of the day when they might again have the power to deny women reproductive rights and control of their own bodies. With Kavanaugh's nomination to the SCOTUS that dream is now a step closer to becoming reality.

If Kavanaugh is confirmed, and this is very likely, the court shifts further right and conservative judicial activism will be the likely result. This will put not only Roe-v-Wade at risk it will also possibly result in the loss of marraige equality as well. It is clear at this point that neither is settled law as both will likely be challenged again and brought before the SCOTUS when it moves further right.

Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination is the result of years of unopposed conservative organizing is an interesting article and it explains how years of work by conservatives as brought us to this point. Click on article to read.

Basically WASF.


  1. I remember Chief Justice Roberts saying during his conformation hearings that Row/Wade was settled law and a legal precedent he would not seek to change.

    Trump said the same thing for decades.

    The Supreme Court selects the cases it will hear. I expect the Court to select an abortion case now that they have the votes to change Roe/Wade.

    Even if Democrats get majority again this Fall, or win the White House back in 2020, it will be hard to change a Supreme Court ruling.

    This is all very sad for future America and hopefully will raise voting participation into the 80% range.

  2. I agree Brad. There is nothing like political pressure to cause legislators, ececutives, and even sometimes justices to pause and think twice about their actions and decisions. An 80+ percent turnout would bode very well for America and the republic. We are in fact NOT an extreme conservative nation. We are essentially a nation of moderates. Regardless what the conservative and republican pundits and politicians would have us believe.

    Conservatives and republicans are all about rights. Rights they are comfortable with. Rights they don't approve of and are not comfortable with they will gladly deny everyone else.

  3. The Federalist Society vetted all the candidates. Nobody has to ask them as to get the recommendation they had to meet the criteria. Not that there were ever any candidates beside Brett. According to what I've been hearing, the Trump administration negotiated with Kennedy and Brett was the replacement he wanted. Such negotiating and deals for who replaces who is obviously a conflict of interest. With Trump administration cases before the court, one naturally wonders if Kennedy ruled the way he did on any of these cases to keep his deal on track. Whether these negotiations influenced his rulings or not is irrelevant. The appearance of a quid pro quo is as much a no-no as an actual quid pro-quo. In that they should absolutely be avoided.

    And, given how leaky the Trump administration is, is it no surprise that this got out? WTF was Kennedy thinking? I'd have thunk he'd know better. This surely does not look good for him. And should sully his legacy given that he basically took a bribe to step down. Brett should be disqualified for that reason alone.

  4. If true it is definitely a conflict of interests.

    I would be very interested in learning the source of this information as I have not yet seen anything giving it verifiable credibility. That is not to say I don't believe it possible. To do so certainly fits tRump's character profile IMO. Or should I say lack of chatacter?

  5. Kennedy was probably trying to protect his son.

  6. From The New Republic

    Did Anthony Kennedy make a deal with Trump?That’s the question raised by reporting from NBC News on Tuesday morning. Reporters Geoff Bennett and Leigh Ann Caldwell tweeted that the departing justice spent months negotiating with the Trump White House about his replacement, and that Kennedy only retired after he received assurances that it would be Brett Kavanaugh, a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals judge and a former Kennedy clerk.

    On Kavanaugh pick

    Kennedy and Trump/WH had been in negotiations for months over Kennedy’s replacement. Once Kennedy received assurances that it would be Kavanaugh, his former law clerk, Kennedy felt comfortable retiring, according to a source who was told of the discussions.

    — Leigh Ann Caldwell (@LACaldwellDC) July 10, 2018
    Source familiar tells NBC that Justice Kennedy had been in negotiations with the Trump team for months over Kennedy’s replacement. Once Kennedy received assurances that it would be Kavanaugh (his former law clerk) Kennedy felt comfortable retiring - @LACaldwellDC & @frankthorp

    — Geoff Bennett (@GeoffRBennett) July 10, 2018
    Politico offered a slightly different account of the Kavanaugh selection process, reporting on Monday night that Kennedy, in a conversation with Trump about his imminent retirement, merely suggested his former clerk as a successor. That recommendation then carried great weight with a president eager to leave his mark on the nation’s judiciary.

    Administration officials said Trump was taken with Kavanaugh even before his conversation with Kennedy. But Kennedy, in leaving the impression with Trump that Kavanaugh would be a great candidate for the job, helped the president make up his mind.

    There’s nothing unusual about a Supreme Court justice timing his or her retirement to ensure an ideologically similar replacement. But what NBC’s report describes is quite different. Any bargaining between a sitting justice and the White House would immediately raise ethical questions about his or her participation in cases involving the president. Kennedy voted to uphold Trump’s controversial travel ban the day before he announced his retirement, for example.

    That said, it’s possible that what happened still fell short of an overt quid pro quo between Kennedy and Trump. The president and other conservatives made little secret of their desire to replace the court’s swing justice after the 2016 election. Trump’s selection last year of Neil Gorsuch, another former Kennedy clerk, to replace Antonin Scalia was widely considered to be a not-so-subtle nod at the 81-year-old jurist that Trump would nominate a similar successor to him. Kennedy may have simply taken the hint and offered a suggestion of his own on the way out.

  7. RBG coughed twice today.....Pelosi got the vapors and Schumer crapped his pants


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 3/4/18 Anonymous commenting has been disabled and this site has reverted to comment moderation. This unfortunate action is necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or irrelevant to the post subject.

While we appreciate and encourage all political viewpoints we feel no obligation to post comments that fail to rise to the standards of decency and decorum we have set for Rational Nation USA.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.