Senate confirms Brett Kavanaugh to Supreme Court

Justice Kavanaugh could soon face first test on abortion issue
October 13, 2018
https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/healthcare/justice-kavanaugh-abortion-issue.htm?utm_source=boomtrain&utm_medium=automated&utm_campaign=ci3&utm_source=boomtrain&utm_medium=automated&utm_campaign=ci3
Justice Kavanaugh could soon face first test on abortion issue
Image Source: Screenshot
The Supreme Court’s conservative shift, with the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh, has many wondering how the nine justices will rule on divisive issues. The answer might be right around the corner.

On Friday, the members of the Supreme Court convened to determine whether or not to hear two abortion cases. Justice Kavanaugh could be the deciding vote. 

Two cases, One issue
The cases that the justices are contemplating putting on the docket are Andersen v. Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri and Gee v. Planned Parenthood of Gulf Coast. 

At issue in both instances is whether, under the Medicaid Act, patients are allowed to bring a lawsuit against their state in federal court in order to receive Medicaid benefits for Planned Parenthood, or, more generally, their preferred provider. In other words, litigants are trying to determine whether state Medicaid programs must fund abortion providers.

Kansas and Louisiana are the latest states attempting to defund abortion providers under their state Medicaid programs. Others include Texas, Tennessee, and South Carolina, but these cases are being handled at the state court level.

These states and others have been looking to defund, in particular, Planned Parenthood which has received much criticism in recent years for unsafe practices, abuse, waste, and fraud.

Federal Court Split
Currently, the issue of whether states must fund abortion providers has not been settled. Federal appellate courts are split on the issue.

The 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th, and 10th circuits have all ruled that the Medicaid Act gives patients the right to receive abortion services, paid for by the state, from any able provider who is willing to help the patient. The 8th Circuit, on the other hand, has gone in just the opposite direction, allowing Arkansas not to waste taxpayer dollars on such funding.

When there is such a split on the federal circuit, that is, typically, the time that the Supreme Court gets involved. In this case, if it does not, then Kansas and Louisiana will have to continue using taxpayer money to fund abortion services through Medicaid.

New court, new approach?
Yesterday, the nine justices had a conference in order to determine whether or not to hear these two cases. The Court is not expected to announce its decision until this upcoming week.

A key vote could be that of Brett Kavanaugh, the newest justice who has the Court now slanting to the political right, 5-4.

Are you anxious to see how Justice Kavanaugh will rule on key issues like abortion?
Yes
No
Next
One of the left’s biggest concerns about Kavanaugh is whether he will help to overturn Roe v. Wade. It is unlikely that this particular decision will provide much insight into that question.
But, at the very least, the court’s decision on whether to hear these cases will give us a first-hand look at how it may handle such issues in the future.

https://www.patriotnewsalerts.com/new-york-witches/?utm_source=boomtrain&utm_medium=automated&utm_campaign=cna1&utm_source=boomtrain&utm_medium=automated&utm_campaign=cna1
New York witches holding public ritual to ‘hex’ Brett Kavanaugh
October 13, 2018 by Jerry McCormick
New York witches holding public ritual to ‘hex’ Brett Kavanaugh
Image Source: Screenshot
It looks like #theResistance has a new strategy to go after newly minted Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson broke the story that a coven of witches in New York is planning a public ceremony next week to “hex” Justice Kavanaugh.

More Insanity
The Democrats pulled out all the stops to try to get Kavanaugh removed from consideration, making it clear from the very beginning that they would never support his nomination.

At the last minute, they produced what now appears to have been an orchestrated allegation from Christine Blasey Ford.

While she never produced any evidence or a corroborating witness, her statements against Kavanaugh were believed as gospel by the left.

Then another woman came forward saying Kavanaugh exposed himself at a public party.

Again, no proof or corroborating witnesses.

Finally, the infamous Michael Avenatti came forward with a client that made such outrageous and unbelievable claims that her story eventually backfired.

While they gave it their best, none of the attacks worked and Kavanaugh was eventually confirmed, though not until his name and character had been unjustly smeared in the eyes of the entire world.

Now that the legal means have been exhausted, witches are literally going to try to work their black magic against Kavanaugh.

Carlson couldn’t resist pointing out how appropriate it is that the party which “conducts witch hunts” also “conducts witchcraft.”

The Coven
The witches that now want to put a hex on Kavanaugh are based out of Brooklyn, New York.

The ceremony is scheduled for next weekend and is reportedly open to the public, for those who enjoy this sort of thing.

According to “Liberal Sherpa” Cathy Areu, who spoke with Tucker Carlson, the coven has already been working against the Trump administration by casting three spells on President Donald Trump.

They believe their spells have successfully hindered Trump’s efforts thus far.

Do You Believe in Witchcraft?
Yes
No
While nobody with any common sense believes in their power, this is still, as Carlson pointed out, a very dangerous situation.

You just never know what someone will do if they believe the powers of the “dark forces” are behind them.

Justice Kavanaugh backs the Trump admin on detaining criminal immigrants
October 12, 2018 by Jerry McCormick
Justice Kavanaugh backs the Trump admin on detaining criminal immigrants
Photo via MSNBC Youtube Video
Justice Brett Kavanaugh (that sounds great, doesn’t it?) is already making his presence felt on the Supreme Court.
https://www.patriotnewsalerts.com/kavanaugh-backs-trump-admin/?utm_medium=ci&utm_source=push&utm_campaign=pna
While liberals are trying to set criminals free on the street, Justice Kavanaugh has sided with the Trump administration and its stricter immigration policy.
Immigration Issues
The issue at hand is a current federal law that mandates that criminal aliens be detained for possible deportation.

According to the law, Homeland Security can take them into custody “when” they are released.

Just “when” that is, though, has been undefined, something the ACLU wants corrected ASAP. In practice, some detentions have taken place years after the conviction.

The ACLU is making the argument that not all criminals are equal.

Their argument is if immigrants have been living and working in our communities for years after a minor conviction, they should be exempt from the mandatory detention policy.

The Trump administration, however, has stated that a 1996 provision stipulates that these immigrants, despite their recent good records, may still be eligible to be deported because of their past criminal convictions.

Kavanaugh Stands Tall
Cecillia Wang, the attorney for the ACLU, thinks 24 hours would be a reasonable definition of “when.”

But Justice Kavanaugh disagreed, stating: “Congress did not put in a time limit.”

“That raises a real question with me whether we should be superimposing a time limit,” Kavanaugh continued.

The new justice went on to explain that when this provision was put in place, Congress was trying to crack down on the problem of undocumented immigrants and crime in this country.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. cited the sheer logistics of the matter — and the added complication of uncooperative states.

Since “dozens, probably hundreds” of immigrants are released from jail in California on a given day, Alito asked: “How is the federal government going to be able to determine quickly, within 48 hours or any short period of time, whether those individuals should be subject to the mandatory detention requirement of this statute? California is not going to tell the federal government, ‘Look. We’re releasing this person.'”

Overall, the justices split along ideological lines, which is good for conservatives.

But Trump’s 2017 Supreme Court appointee, Justice Neil Gorsuch, wondered if there was any limitation on how long after release the government could detain someone.

“Could be it 30 years? Is there any limit on the government’s power?” Gorsuch asked.

Do You Support the Trump Administration’s Immigration Policy?
Yes
No
Next
By the end of the session, it sounded as though SCOTUS would be backing this administration’s stance.

Progressive activists launch effort to impeach Justice Brett Kavanaugh
October 11, 2018
https://www.conservativeinstitute.org/conservative-news/progressive-effort-impeach-kavanaugh.htm?
Image Source: Screenshot
Democrats are unwilling to put their Supreme Court misadventures to bed with November midterms fast approaching. After pulling out all of the stops to try to defeat Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, progressives have one final surprise left in their political bag of tricks: impeachment.

If at first you don’t succeed …
In a grueling confirmation process that lasted 89 long days, where Kavanaugh testified in public for more than 32 hours and answered more than 1,300 written questions, Democrats elected to drag an honorable and qualified nominee’s name through the mud with unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct. When efforts to derail the confirmation process with “Spartacus moments” failed, Democrats introduced salacious and unprovable allegations of sexual misconduct that grew more obscene and unlikely with each new accuser.

To most Americans, that they were dealing with an undisguised smear campaign was woefully apparent. However, an unhinged minority of militant liberals were galvanized by the Democratic Party’s underhanded operation, and their shrill screams to “Cancel Kavanaugh” echoed through the halls of the Hart Senate Building with each passing week.

Even after Kavanaugh was confirmed in a 50-to-48 vote along almost purely partisan lines, this radical, feminist minority appear to be calling the shots in the Democratic Party and are demanding Kavanaugh’s immediate impeachment.

They are strong enough in numbers to have eked out 173,000 signatures in an online petition demanding Kavanaugh’s impeachment, but not numerous enough to have reached their modest goal of just 200,000 signatures since he was confirmed nearly a week ago. “There is no room for an accused sexual predator and liar on the Supreme Court,” the petition, organized by the far-left Credo Action group, claims.

Credo Action makes semantic and unconvincing arguments that Kavanaugh lied under oath during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. For instance, the petition states that Kavanaugh lied when he said, “I got [accepted into Yale University] by busting my tail,” because his grandfather’s enrollment in the school would have advantaged his application.

Yet, Credo can hardly know for sure if Kavanaugh disclosed his grandfather’s alumnus status on his college application — and even if he did, this does not mean that he lied by saying he worked hard to get into school, or that he was being dishonest to suggest that he was accepted based upon these merits.

The petition also states that Kavanaugh was not being truthful when he said that, “All the witnesses who were there [when his accuser says she was assaulted] say it didn’t happen.” Here, Kavanaugh’s critics are only pointing out that witnesses didn’t recall a gathering that fit the accuser’s description, not that “it didn’t happen,” a characterization that hardly qualifies as perjury.

And Democrats wonder why the president is wary of a perjury trap in his own witch hunt.  

Is it time for liberals to abandon their efforts to harm Brett Kavanaugh?
Yes
No
Kicking and screaming
Of course, one would have to suffer from delusional fantasies to believe that a last-ditch effort to impeach the newest Supreme Court justice could succeed. Democrats need to pick up 23 seats to win the House, and though this is a distinct possibility, they will surely fall short of the two-thirds majority needed to impeach Kavanaugh.

Democrats face an even tougher battle in the Senate, where establishing a narrow majority is looking increasingly improbable. The irony is that the deceitful tactics that Democrats employed to oppose the Kavanaugh nomination is precisely what has imperiled their blue wave this November and energized Republicans.

Some liberal media personalities are even suggesting that if the rules aren’t working in their favor, they should change them. In the aftermath of Kavanaugh’s confirmation, NBC News National security correspondent Ken Dilanian actually called for an end to America’s bicameral legislature because “North Dakota and New York get the same representation in the Senate.”
Ken Dilanian

@KenDilanianNBC
 It may not happen in our lifetimes, but the idea that North Dakota and New York get the same representation in the Senate has to change.  “Senators representing less than half the U.S. are about to confirm a nominee opposed by most Americans” https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/10/06/senators-representing-less-than-half-us-are-about-confirm-nominee-opposed-by-most-americans/ …

5:23 PM - Oct 6, 2018
Analysis | Senators representing less than half the U.S. are about to confirm a nominee opposed by...
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh was nominated by a president who lost the popular vote and has majority disapproval.
washingtonpost.com
9,708
12.8K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Similarly, following another Republican appointment to the Supreme Court, liberal publications soon responded with calls to end lifetime appointments for Supreme Court justices. Bustle, New Republic, Vox, NPR, and the New York Times have each lobbied for an end to lifetime stints on the highest court in the aftermath of Democratic defeats.

Ultimately, all of this posturing and finger-pointing amounts to kicking and screaming from the left, who simply can’t cope with the prospect of defeat. Thanks to a conservative majority on the Supreme Court that should last as long as 30 years, Democrats will just have to get used to losing.

Democrats consider changing the number of justices on the Supreme Court if they win the presidency
October 8, 2018 by Jerry McCormick
https://www.patriotnewsalerts.com/democrats-consider-changing-justices/?utm_medium=ci&utm_source=push&utm_campaign=pna
WEBN-TV / CCL
If you thought the Brett Kavanaugh saga is over, you were sadly mistaken.

Extremely upset over the conservative tilt of the Supreme Court after Kavanaugh was confirmed, Democrats are now considering adding two more justices to the Supreme Court.

Still Going After Kavanaugh
The Democrat fight against Kavanaugh is far from over.

While some Democrats have retreated and are licking their wounds, others are still pursuing him in the hopes of impeaching the new associate justice.

Democrats in office are still aggressively pursuing Kavanaugh’s records from his time in the George W. Bush administration.

There are also rumors that Democrats are continuing to pursue private testimony that will somehow refute something Kavanaugh stated while under oath.

But if that does not work, there are some other plans in the works.

More Justices
One plan that has been floated depends upon the Democrats gaining a majority in Congress and winning the White House in 2020.

If they do, there are more than a few people that believe they will try to add two more justices to the Supreme Court.

If that happens and they have the White House, a Democrat would be nominating the two justices, giving the high court a liberal tilt.

Before you say they can’t do that — they can.

While the Constitution established the Supreme Court, it does not dictate how many members are to sit on the court.

Initially, in 1789, six members were seated, but that number was changed to seven in 1807.

In 1837, the number climbed to nine, and was increased to 10 in 1863.

Congress reduced the number back to seven in 1866, but it was once again raised to nine in 1869.

The Constitution has left it up to Congress to dictate how many justices are needed, so if Democrats win a majority in the House and Senate and have a president in the White House, adding seats to the Supreme Court is something they may very well consider.

This tactic was actually tried one before by Teddy Roosevelt, who wanted to stack the court with friendly justices to ram through his New Deal legislation.

Do You Think Dems Would Add Justices?
Yes
No
Next
His efforts were thwarted by Congress, just as conservatives must thwart the new Democrat threat by voting Republican in November as well as the 2020 election season.

As you can see, if Democrats regain power, there are no lengths they will not explore to tilt the system in their favor.

Kavanaugh confirmed & sworn in as US Supreme Court justice amid protests
Published time: 6 Oct, 2018 19:56
Edited time: 7 Oct, 2018 07:51
Get short URLhttps://on.rt.com/9fwe
VIDEO RT
Tom Williams / Reuters
Brett Kavanaugh has become the fifth conservative judge in America’s highest court, after being narrowly confirmed by senators and quickly sworn in amid protests in the aftermath of sexual assault allegations against him.
In a chamber where Republicans hold the narrowest of majorities, all senators voted in accordance with party lines, with the exception of Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who endorsed Kavanaugh, and Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski, who voted against. The final result was 50 to 48 in favor of Kavanaugh. 

Some screams could be heard in the gallery ahead of the vote, with Vice President Mike Pence calling for order to be restored. The disruptions continued periodically throughout the roll call.


The vote marks the end of the most fraught successful confirmation process at least since the 1991 appointment of Clarence Thomas, another conservative judge, who was also nearly derailed by claims of personal misconduct. 

The decision is being seen as a win for Trump, who applauded the Senate in a tweet immediately following the vote, and a blow to Democrats.

A petition to have Kavanaugh impeached was started immediately after he was voted onto the Supreme Court by the group Free Speech for People.

“No one is above the law, not even a Supreme Court Justice,” co-founder and president of Free Speech For People John Bonifaz said in a statement.

Read more
Jonathan Ernst / Reuters   164 arrested at Capitol steps amid desperate attempt to block Kavanaugh confirmation (VIDEOS)
The result was not in serious doubt after a group of potential Republican swing voters confirmed on Friday that they would go ahead with President Donald Trump’s nominee, following an investigation by the FBI that failed to unearth evidence of sexual assault.

One day before the final vote, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told Fox News' 'The Ingraham Angle' that the "mob" was not able to intimidate the Senate.

“We stood up to the mob. We did the right thing for a good man that filled a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court," he said, calling Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) "outstanding" in her 44-minute speech in which she detailed the reasons she would be backing Kavanaugh.

Some Democrats are blaming Michael Avenatti, the attorney who represented Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick, for making the case against Kavanaugh less powerful, as she ultimately faced questions about her credibility when she appeared to walk back some of her previous statements and it appeared she had a history of legal disputes.

When asked if Avenatti had been helpful, Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) said on Saturday: "I think we should have focused on the serious allegations that certainly appeared very credible to me that would be our best course of action," CNN reported. It also cited an anonymous Democratic senator and an aide, both of whom agreed.

Avenatti responded on Saturday by saying it is "disgusting that these cowards blame my client and the other accusers from coming forward."

Read more
Protesters occupy Sen. Joe Manchin's office after Friday's cloture vote Yuri GripasSenators Flake, Manchin, Collins have their offices surrounded by protesters after Kavanaugh vote
Ahead of the vote, the Senate held its final debate. As they did so, anti-Kavanaugh protesters turned out in force on the US Capitol, many of them breaking barriers to access the steps of the building. Some were arrested.

Many of the demonstrators held signs reading "I am a survivor, not a troublemaker," recalling the #troublemaker hashtag used by President Donald Trump on Friday in reference to protesters who opposed Kavanaugh's nomination.

Despite weeks of pointed and tempestuous questioning by senators, Brett Kavanaugh, a 53-year-old Yale graduate, who rose to prominence as a member of Ken Starr’s legal team, which led the campaign to impeach Bill Clinton two decades ago, appeared set for a relatively straightforward confirmation.

But an eleventh hour accusation in late September by Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh attempted to rape her during a 1982 school party upended the entire process, with help from the Senate Democrats, who had held on to the allegations since July.

The dueling testimonies by Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh in front of the Senate last week provided one of the most memorable and partisan political spectacles in recent American history. Liberals and women’s groups turned this into a referendum on dealing with unpunished past sex crimes, while conservatives painted the judge as a victim of an opportunistic smear campaign, ahead of November’s midterms.

Kavanaugh gives the conservatives their first reliable majority on the nine-person panel since the mid-20th century, and though Democrats could attempt to impeach the judge in the future, they will need two-thirds backing in Senate, something that is considered unlikely unless new firm allegations come to light.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!


2 Men Claim Christine Ford Mistook Them for Kavanaugh
Sen. Orrin Hatch speaks with reporters on Capitol Hill
Senator Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, speaks with reporters about Judge Brett Kavanaugh on Capitol Hill Wednesday. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)
By Sandy Fitzgerald    |   Thursday, 27 September 2018 06:57 AM
 https://www.newsmax.com/politics/kavanaugh-republicans-ford-scotus/2018/09/27/id/883653/?
Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have spoken to two men who say Christine Blasey Ford may have mistaken them as the person who sexually assaulted her when she was a high school student in the early 1980s, rather than Brett Kavanaugh.

Late Wednesday, they revealed that they'd conducted their first interview Monday with one man who thinks he, not Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Ford in 1982, reports Fox News. A second interview was conducted on Tuesday, they said.

Then on Wednesday, the Republicans said in the statement, they got a "more in-depth written statement from the man interviewed twice previously, who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter in question with Dr. Ford."

Meanwhile, the GOP investigators said they also spoke on the phone with a second man, claiming that he was the one Ford remembered.

Ford has insisted that there is "zero chance" that she confused Kavanaugh with anyone else as the person who held her down on a bed during the 1982 house party, groped her, and held his hand over her mouth to stop her screams.

An aide to Democrats on the Judiciary Committee told NBC News that Republicans "are flailing," and "desperately trying to muddy the waters," NBC News' Peter Alexander posted on Twitter ​Wednesday.

The aide also called the claims "shameful and the height of irresponsibility."

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, hit back on Twitter about the complaint, saying "some might find it exceedingly difficult to imagine Judiciary Committee Democrats expressing this complaint with straight faces."

Related Stories:
2 Last Minute Anonymous Kavanaugh Accusers, But 1 Recants
Third Kavanaugh Accuser Had Restraining Order Against Her
2018 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Read Newsmax: Two Men Claim They, Not Kavanaugh, Attacked Christine Ford | Newsmax.com