Limit the scope of argument to, "He did it/ He didn't do it!" and people won't pay attention to the guy's actual résumé.

Yep! Nobody ever gets on the court who is anti establishment.

Hell no they don’t!!! That might actually create “ progress”

Progress is meaningless.

“Progress is meaningless.” How so?

Can you define it?

I would attempt to define it as A. Breaking out of the 2 party paradigm B. More personal responsibility less welfare/nanny state. C. Holding banks/corporations responsible for their shenanigans! D. NOT looking for elected officials to change the power structure for the benefit of “ the 99%”. To name a few.

Examples aren't definitions, sweetie.

"To move forward." "Gradual betterment." ...Those are two definitions from Webster's that fit the context.

Better? Is that universal? Progress is moral you would say?

Define universal. Define moral. Define is. Progress is subjective but apathy is worthless and so is trolling.

You're the one who said "better". That's a moral judgement.. Don't troll with your slick Willy define is bs.

Define universal. Define moral. Define is. Progress is subjective but apathy is worthless and so is trolling.

This can't be a serious response..

Can you define serious?

... Serious; a vital or important thing.

Now, can you realize how saying "gradual betterment" contains within it a moral ideal of "better". Did you realize "progressivism" was a moral movement?

... I think you broke VelocisaurusRap.

They do this on purpose. Misrepresenting people's arguments on purpose is their thing.

I know, it sad and funny at the same time.

Funny how all you have to do is show conviction and prove you have something to fight to make them so transparent..

They aren't allowed to take positions. And if they do they have to leave room to weasel out of any affirmative statement. Makes it tough to argue if you don't even believe or understand what you're shilling.

I have had my fair share of encounters with such folks on a different topic/ sub as conspiracy, i am more a lurker here. And indeed, some are sticking out like a sour thumb with their replies when provoked.

Ever been to /r/c_s_t? That's my other hang out. Give it a visit.

I have been there a couple of times and found some gems of posts there. Personaly i am more active in the "fringe" areas of reddit, trying to make some sense of what i experience and see and figuring out the links to all else going on in this "reality".

Keep it up!

Thanks, you too!

That is because to a conservative progress must not be allowed.

(((Progress)))

Congratulations, you get my reactionary of the day award or maybe it should be the Orwell award.

/please note that is meant for laughs as I believe your comment is.

Not that it'll save him from -10 votes, but I think I get it:

Progress in comparison to...?

With no established basis, it's hard to gauge improvement.

What's progress to one could also be regress to another.

If someone chooses to suppress the desire to commit violence, they have not achieved anything, yet have still technically progressed, while a rational reasonable person would never have to overcome this "hurdle."

It's a weird word, progress. Can't say I've ever given it this much thought before.

What's progress to one could also be regress to another.

Yes, that is one of the things that block, social progress, opposition from the religions and the wealthiest who benefit from the beliefs and practices. Allowing divorce. Universal Education Excising religious based laws from the legal system.

Also fall into that category.

Please, define it. What does progress mean in the context of society?

A big important one is the right for women to have equal political power (the right to vote). and workplace opportunities.

Property rights for women.

Recognizing that gender is not strictly according to the bible and not punishing and abusing people who are LGBT.

How is that a definition... That's another group of examples.

A definition is something like, progress; the phenomena wherein a society grows more egalitarian in exchange for personal liberty. That's s definition. You try.

If you say so, but what about a more egalitarian society limits personal liberty when it in fact allows personal liberty for for all.

And that is what the other user said, progress to some is regression to others.

Are you one of those who considers it to be regressive. What personal liberty have you lost to social progress?

That was just one example of how progress can be defined.

Can you define it?

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”

Noam Chomsky.

It definitely happened here.

Will always be a top 10 quote of mine.

I don't think that's it. I think that the Democrats either didn't think that that argument would work. Didn't care. Or just so horribly incompetent that they didn't even try

I think the Democrats are 100% serious about stopping his confirmation.

I think the Democrats are 100% serious about stopping his confirmation.

I mean they should be but not for the sexual allegations reasons.

This quote has been so accurate for a lot of the shit going on the last 3 years.. Time and time again I find this quote striking a cord almost daily.

Try the last 50+ years.

Oh you are right for sure. Just think the last few years have been so hyperhyped (I’m making that word up because that’s the only way I can explain it). Non issues targeted as massive issues all with the purpose of pitting me against my neighbor. The MSM just drums it up even more.

But limiting the spectrum...

The Delphi Method

brought to you by the Rand Corporation

There's a few accounts posting this quote.

There's a few accounts posting this quote.

Do you have something you would like to say? It's a popular quote and is directly related to the conversation. MadQuixoticians statement is paraphrasing the quote.

To be fair, the Senate was all set to ram Kavanaugh through before the sexual assault allegations went public. I know it looks like that was a distraction, but the truth is there was nobody to distract. There was never any amount of talking that was going to get the 50 senators who voted for him, to vote against him.

And it did absolutely nothing. The senators don’t need to be distracted. The confusion of hypernormalization is aimed at us.

I tried talking to people about his actual voting record, but no one gave a fuck.

The marching orders were to make it all about the sex scandal. You tried and that's what counts. I sat most of the argument out and really only commented that the inclusion of the polygraph was likely for show considering polygraphs are inadmissible.

Hello fellow Trump supporters

pls listen to me, we've been fooled

p.s. We should riot in the streets

I got my antifa outfit all picked out! It's botchen

I got my nails to match the outfit

OwO

Yasssss QQueen! Snap!

Can I bring the matching panties.

They are all passed out at the meet-up spot.

Hope they have pink sparkles.

You know they're just as fascists right? Holy shit. You don't fight fascism with fascism.

Real fascism has never been tried.

Go on...Fascism is a pretty nebulous term; how was Nazi Germany not truly fascist?

Wait, He wasn't being completely sarcastic?

Isn't that exactly what Franco's Spain was?

Man, you guys are funny.

What? Lol. Stop kidding.

You are going to be surprised when you find out that antifa is a conservative dirty trick group. Like that faked up "campus free speech movement," that Mercer helped fund.

It's all on [17] now. If they fail or are part of a ruse, we might as well head up to the hills and start compounds.

Yes, agreed, though I don't think that will be necessary, I do believe they are in control, in many ways and the gas lighting of the base to energize us is intentional I think, though has went on longer than expected..

Who is that? Sorry I'm out of the loop

Q

You need to learn to fight with your mind.

Hell yeah my dude, that's why 90% of my post history is here :D

No thanks. We're good. Over half the country wants this. You're a retarded, brainwashed college kid who has no idea how to think beyond what your professors and "very wise and mature" friends are being activists towards. Take your socialism elsewhere because you'll have to step over mine and 60+ million others dead bodies to try it.

Fact check, we're not the ones who will start that shit. Not even close - none of us want a fight. Even up the minute, theoretically, we still won't want it. If you all lose your fucking minds and become super violent, leaving us no choice, we'll win defensively and quickly.

Now fuck off and make something of yourself. When I was 10 I started in graphic design. Now, in my late late twenties, I'm a designer and developer making nearly 6 figures. I sacrificed everything for this. Your excuse? Is it the system, bro? Is that why you're being a fascist fucking retard right now?

Fucking make something of yourself like I did. Get off your "we're in the matrix of mind control" bullshit and have a fucking go at life. Fuck man. So much potential just wasted because you want to be an activist to inflate your ego. Wake the fuck up.

no we should not "riot" anywhere. do you want to be like Antifa? Rioting accomplishes nothing. Protesting accomplishes nothing. Living your life the way you think is right, does change things. Hate soda and think it's poison? teach you and your family, children about it and don't buy soda. Don't like the system? persuade people with books, music, intelligence, conversations. We have the ability to create a certain way of thinking together online! we need better ideas and our morals need to strengthen. We love too much crap rap music and shit that wastes our time. our CULTURE needs change, change happens over time.

yOu ThInK RaP aNd SoDa ArE tHe PrObLeM?!

fuck, my comment was too real lol

should have added a /s haha

Worse than nothing. Actively attacking TPTB allows them to spin the story into "We're just gonna shave off a little more of your freedoms to protect you from these dangerous right/left/religious extremists. It's for your own good, believe us."

We just hafta embody the change we want in how we live our lives.

It doesn’t matter cuz they’ll just send in government agents to riot anyway even if the protest was peaceful, they’ve been doing that shit since the truther movement or before, happened at Occupy Wall St. , and all the 2016/17 riots

As a fellow Trump supporter, I agree! We should also stop being so bigoted and fascist!

You are posing as a Trump supporter, urging us towards violence (which were not stupid, we see right through it). Fuck yourself. No, really, go fuck right off with your rhetoric.

We don't riot in the streets - leftists do.

We don't incite mass violence - leftists do.

We don't want your socialist utopia, fascist - the real fascists, commie.

Now, that being said, you step up against us and it'll be a 1 minute war. It'll end quickly and swiftly, not in your favor. You'll be thrown out of America permanently for inciting a bullshit civil war.

You're a crybaby who can't control your emotions or think critically so you let CNN tell you what to think and how to feel, fucking NPC bot.

Do the world a favor and cut your Ethernet cable.

man I really should have put that /s lol

I think it's more complicated than that, but yes, his history is concerning and it really makes you wonder why the Democrats didn't focus on that (tho we know they're police-staters as well) versus a process that was transparently and brazenly corrupt. They activated almost every political weapon against the guy and totally exposed themselves as corrupt, evil fucks, especially to those who only pay attention peripherally.

Interstingly, Kav did have decisions that went against the Admin's overreach, so maybe he was put there for a different purpose.

If you need to demolish a building, who better to help you than one of the original architects?

who better to help you than one of the original architects?

Much like he has used swamp monsters to do limited scope jobs like Tillerson, McMaster and Hailey

Use em to their fullest extent towards your goals, discard them when they've become useless

Or when they've realized that he's retarded, insulted him, and then got fired for it

Except that the Dems passed the Patriot Act without a complaint and endorsed and went along with the state of emergency that still exists.

They had eight long years under Obama to change anything they objected to and simply added a few more wrinkles to it that were all just as bad and draconian.

If you need to demolish a building, who better to help you than one of the original architects?

Oh give me a break. That is not how the fucking law works.

Both parties are in on this

You just realized this?

Dude. THE SYSTEM sucks.

Wake up, bro. Not being a jerk, but yeah...Wake up. The system is not on the side of the people.

If the people the population entrusts to say what is or isn't treason are the very people being treasonous, then the people are doing it wrong.

...and we as a citizenry seem to be doing it pretty wrong.

In the modern context of Trump its easy to forget this. The left hates him so much that its hard to see the game is still the same rigged game it has been for more than half a century.

The left hates him so much that its hard to see the game is still the same rigged game it has been for more than half a century.

Very much agreed.

In the modern context of Trump its easy to forget this.

Well...people need to be more critically thinking is all. This, unfortunately, is no easy thing to do when the MSM and TPTB work so hard at keeping the population so dumbed down...and do it with such lamentable success... :/

Joe Biden basically wrote the Patriot act, and he also voted for the Iraq War, so yea. They do not want you to think about the Patriot act with all of this Kavanaugh drama. For a while there it seemed like Biden was going to be the 2020 presidential candidate, but I think the diddling stuff got out too much in the public.

I know some people thought Trump was going to reduce military spending and all of that stuff, but that never happened. He's just a walking distraction at this point, so I have to laugh at both sides on this. The one side takes the distraction bait and blows their load on hating Trump as if they're "sticking it to the man," and the other side has to defend a guy whose purpose is to distract us. Kinda funny.

Military spending has gone up with every Republican president.

i didn't think there were slide threads on reddit until now

yes

Accused by 3 CIA assets who worked the black mail ops of potential politicians, corporate moguls, and...SC nominees.

Deep State 2.0 implemented as the Old Guard fascists are culled.

This is truly surprising. I never thought an angry drunken rapist would be an overall piece of shit when he’s not drinking and sexually assaulting people. Shocking. No, seriously, completely bamboozled. Never woulda seen that one coming.

It’s definitely the Democrats fault when you thought he was a great pick when he was only accused of sexual assault by multiple credible women. I mean there they were screaming this guy is a rapist and a liar just to confuse you into thinking he was a great guy. Classic democrat move. If only there was a way to forget bullshit party lines and think with your own brain.

I respect your admitting that. Well what is there to do now but try to fix things? It really makes no different if you were a lifelong Democrat or if you just decided yesterday that it's for you-- what really makes a difference is your vote in the next election.

Fuck the dems and reps. We should start the Bull Moose Party) up again. Good ole Teddy.

I get that. I say just try to educate yourself and for your conscience. I think it'd be cool if I could just tell you how to vote and you'd do it.. But that's not how democracy works. The way I see it proper democracy is only as functional as it citizens are informed , and that's why so many people are so interested in misinforming the American public. I get you, I don't really like either party-- it's choosing the better of two evils at this point. But this isn't the first time America was in the place. I think if we keep making the right decisions we'll dig ourselves out of this hole yet. Yeah man it's no joke but I just try to remember we still have time

Wait until you find out that Kavanaugh isn't a fascist and he didn't actually help write the PATRIOT ACT. You are either pretending to be a flipped Trump supporter or you are falling for a trick.

He is a war criminal.

Utterly preposterous. In each of the cases listed in that blog post, it is easy to understand his logic and there is nothing radical about his decisions. Each of those cases falls into one of three situations:

1. Since he is on a lower court, he is bound by Supreme Court precedent and so he does his job as a cog in the justice system.

2. He chooses to defer to the precedent set by his current court, which is standard practice when there is not a compelling reason to do otherwise. In any case, such a decision is clearly not unusual.

3. He correctly argues that the question is not appropriate for the judiciary to answer because of how the Constitution is written. In those situations, he correctly insists that Congress will need to pass statutes to impose the desired limitations on war time powers.

He can't possibly be a war criminal because he has never been in a position to make a decision that could make him a war criminal.

We know that Kavanaugh is a strict Constitutionalist, and the Constitution grants pretty significant war time powers to the President. The Constitution was written this way intentionally because war is ugly and the President is supposed to be working in good faith for the good of the country. The drafters of the Constitution did not envision a future where the Presidency would be compromised by a looming threat of assassination so the military could be hijacked as a tool for globalization (as we have seen in the past several administrations). The reason Kavanaugh is being opposed so heavily is that Trump will face judicial challenge when he uses his Constitutional powers to wage war against the deep state. The deep state knows what is coming and they wanted to force Trump to have a split Supreme Court so that activist judges on the lower courts can make rulings against his imminent actions. With the appointment of Kavanaugh, we have a Supreme Court that will uphold the somewhat extreme actions that Trump deems necessary to truly drain the swamp, as he said he would do. At the same time, his appointment came with dozens of lower Federal court appointments to prevent judicial activism for the remainder of his term. The focus on Kavanaugh was all smoke and mirrors to distract from the real concern that the deep state is about to get fucked in the face.

I dont remember the part of the constitution that gives the government more power during war. Also if I am correct, we technically arent in any wars because congress hasnt authorized one.

Read it again. Also, war time powers can apply to any threat against the Republic, not just a declared state of war. Check out Trump's EO from December 21st, 2017. He declared a state of emergency under the premise of global corruption and human rights abuses. The Constitution authorizes the President to use the military in unorthodox ways to meet any threat to the Republic. All it takes is a declared state of emergency.

Also, bush was calling senators to lobby for this guy to get confirmed. The "deep state" isnt opposing this guy.

Covering his ass, trying to rewrite history. Possibly part of a plea agreement to cooperate with the administration.

Also he does have reason to rule different in those cases. Its called, the bill of rights. Some stupid law.doesnt superseed the constitution.

That's not how being a judge works. When the Supreme Court has already made a ruling, the lower court has no authority to ignore that precedent. The Supreme Court has ruled that collecting phone metadata is not an unreasonable search because a warrant is still required to use the information (which is just a record of who you called and when). A warrant has always been required to actually listen to your calls or view your text messages. You're right that Congress needs to amend the constitution if you think this interpretation of the 4th amendment is too broad.

Also torture is a warcrime.

No doubt, but he has never been in a position to rule on the legality of torture. His legal arguments were all technically correct in the cases that potentially involved torture. People who are mad at him over this don't understand his role as a judge. He can't just make rulings about whatever he wants.

So there are no Republicans in the deep state because they obviously wouldn’t have voted him in if he was a threat

No, there are some. McCain was one of the most prominent among them. Trump has managed to flip most of those who remain to cooperate. He's probably cutting lots of deals in the process. Even rats understand self-preservation. It's not as straightforward as you say.

this reads like some “trust the plan, trump is fighting for you” bullshit

I happen to believe that is the case. Of course, I can't be sure, but that is the direction my gut is pulling me.

Look dude, I aint got time to fucking read this guys entire life

Takes less than two minutes to read a wall of text. Yet you can make posts on reddit.

Dude, Obama (the Democrat-Jesus) renewed the Patriot Act. None of them want to give that up that kind of power.

No Both houses of Congress, both Republican majority voted to renew it but there were some limitations made. The Senate vote was 65-32 so it was bipartisan. I only mentioned the Republican majority because that majority could have stopped it.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/243850-obama-signs-nsa-bill-renewing-patriot-act-powers

None of them

(my post) Was implied ALL of them or BOTH of them (Dems & Repubs).

No one ever complained when it was revealed that Sotomayor hates white people. Double standards enough?

I'm sure many people complained, you just didn't hear it.

I've been pointing this out for weeks, but everyone's more interested in yellow journalism than his record.

And loves mass surveillance... and beer, a lot of beer. Do you like to drink aetheradept? Do you?

Ditto. Ain't never had a weed hangover, or shroom withdrawals.

I doubt the GOP is unaware of his voting record, so I'm not sure that focusing on that would have done anything either.

Absolutely. Everyone here seems to think that both sides, left and right, act in unison / hand-in-hand behind the smoke and mirrors.. this is certainly true in smaller instances and I used to think this way as well... sure, they agree on all of the major problems but disagree on the smaller, manufactured “issues” that could really be solved rather easily.. but I don’t know now..

Now I just think that there are a handful of multiple groups of extremely powerful people fighting for power over the country / world and that these struggles for power are actually real and not “acted”

It’s easy to chalk everything off as if it’s a conspiracy..

There are still a lot of good, powerful people in the world working for the people.

Because it would have eventually tied him to things that don't fit the left's narrative : United States v. Askew, a stop-and-frisk case. The police stopped the suspect based on suspicion that he had just committed an armed robbery. After an initial frisk for weapons came up empty, an officer unzipped the suspect’s outer jacket to see if his clothing matched eyewitness descriptions of what the robber was wearing. It turned out the initial frisk had been poorly done: Unzipping the jacket revealed a gun in Askew’s waist pouch. Remarkably, the D.C. Circuit went en banc and divided sharply over whether the outer-jacket unzipping was allowed. As I joked at the time, the D.C. Circuit’s 85 pages of serious constitutional analysis, spread over three opinions, was “the latest in zipper jurisprudence.”

Askew is factually messy and a bit hard to summarize, but the most significant legal issue was whether the Fourth Amendment permits the police to move a suspect’s clothing to facilitate an eyewitness identification during a stop that is otherwise valid under the Supreme Court’s 1968 decision in Terry v. Ohio. There was no obvious answer from Supreme Court caselaw. The en banc D.C. Circuit did not reach a majority view on the issue, although five of its 11 judges, Judges Harry Edwards, Judith Rogers, David Tatel, Janice Brown and Thomas Griffith, argued that identification searches were not permitted. Kavanaugh wrote a 32-page dissent, joined by then-Chief Judge David Sentelle and Judges Karen Henderson and Raymond Randolph, that argued that the unzipping to help identification should be allowed. In his view, the reasonableness framework that applies to Terry stops generally also permits reasonable identification procedures.

Wesby v. District of Columbia, which involved trespass arrests at a loud party held in a vacant house. When the police arrived, and the people in the house had trouble identifying whose house it was, the police arrested everyone for trespass. The group sued the officers under the Fourth Amendment. In an opinion by Judge Cornelia Pillard, the D.C. Circuit somewhat remarkably held that the arrests violated the Fourth Amendment and that qualified immunity did not apply. Kavanaugh penned a dissent from denial of rehearing en banc that was joined by Henderson, Brown and Griffith.

States v. Maynard, later reviewed by the Supreme Court under the name United States v. Jones. Investigators placed a GPS device on the suspect’s car and tracked its location for 28 days. In an astonishing opinion for the D.C. Circuit, Ginsburg created the “mosaic theory” by which the monitoring was not a search at first but over time became a search because the government collected a search-like amount of information. The en banc D.C. Circuit denied the petition for rehearing 5-4. Kavanaugh joined Sentelle’s dissent from denial of rehearing, which argued that the panel opinion was inconsistent with Supreme Court and other circuits’ precedents and deserved en banc review.

The most interesting part of Kavanaugh’s approach to Maynard is that he wrote a brief separate dissent that flagged an alternative ground for ruling that a search occurred. Maybe it was the installation of the GPS that was a search, Kavanaugh suggested, rather than its use. Fourth Amendment caselaw before Katz v. United States had held that physical intrusion onto property was a search. If that caselaw was still valid – “and I see no indication that it is not,” Kavanaugh added – then installing the GPS device could be a search because it was an unauthorized physical encroachment on to the property of the suspect’s car. “I do not yet know whether I agree with that conclusion,” Kavanaugh wrote, “but it is an important and close question” deserving en banc review. When the government petitioned for certiorari, the lawyers for the defense added Kavanaugh’s theory as a second question presented in their brief in opposition.

United States v. Jones on the Fourth Amendment implications of both installing the GPS device and its use. The majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia essentially adopted Kavanaugh’s approach. Installing a GPS was deemed a search because the installation trespassed on to the car. Jones sharply changed Fourth Amendment blackletter law by recognizing two different ways of establishing a search: the Katz test and the pre-Katz trespass test that Kavanaugh had proposed. To be sure, Kavanaugh’s view didn’t come from nowhere. There had been something of a split on the question, and I agreed at the time that this should be the big question. But Kavanaugh was the one who best articulated the theory and teed it up for the justices.

Klayman v. Obama, Judge Richard Leon had ruled for the district court that the National Security Agency’s Section 215 call-records program violated the Fourth Amendment. Under the program, the NSA was getting the numbers dialed (but not the contents) for millions of Americans’ phone calls. Leon ruled that the program was unconstitutional but then stayed any remedy while the appeal was pending. The D.C. Circuit sent the case back to the district court on procedural grounds. With the Section 215 program about to expire, Leon quickly handed down a new decision that the program was unlawful and refused to grant a stay. The next day, the D.C. Circuit issued an administrative stay; plaintiff Larry Klayman then sought an emergency petition for rehearing en banc, which the full court denied.

Kavanaugh filed a two-page solo concurrence in the denial of rehearing. In his view, the Section 215 program was “entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment.” That was true for two reasons. First, the Supreme Court had held that collecting telephony metadata was not a search in Smith v. Maryland. Smith settled the Section 215 question, in Kavanaugh’s view: “That precedent remains binding on lower courts in our hierarchical system of absolute vertical stare decisis.” Second, even if a future court adopted a different a view of what is a search, the Section 215 program was still reasonable under the balancing of interests of the “special needs” exception (see the discussion of Vilsack above). “[T]elephony metadata serves a critically important special need – preventing terrorist attacks on the United States,” Kavanaugh wrote, citing the 2004 9/11 Commission Report. “[T]hat critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program.”

Great write up, although I can't figure what you're trying to say in response to my comment. If you're saying the dems secretly wanted him on the court, which is how I'm understanding your comment at the moment, then making up/bringing forth these allegations seems very unnecessary and doesnt pass oceans razor to me at all. If that's not your point I'd love some clarification.

My point is that both sides made sure the focus stayed sexual misconduct, because at his core the guy is pro establishment. There was a bipartisan effort to keep the coverage and focus on the he said/she said bullshit. Because he's always sided with the government. Democrat or Republican he's always been a lapdog of the police state.

Thank you for explaining further, I understand your point and think it has merit, but I still think that the past few weeks would be hard to classify as just song and dance from the democrats. It seems to me that they did everything they could to prevent his nomination.

This is how controlled opposition works, you still think it was a contest.

You might be right, I don't think we really have a way to prove one way or another. Good talking to you.

I don't why it became so partisan, because his bullshit started under Clinton, continued with Bush, carried on with Obama, and there's no change with Trump.

Did you listening to the first hearing? It sounds like you did not. Dems have been trying get Kavanaugh's records released since his nomination and the White House has refused. Dems will get those records when they get supoena power in the House.

Controlled Opposition

is when a deliberate attempt is made to either create an opposing effort to any existing power base, or, to obtain control of any opposition to one's own efforts. Some protest movements are actually being led by government or corporate agents.

That's pretty insulting.

Huh? How did I offend you?

Not you, the way the dems treat the voters.

Yep. Kavanaugh is a grade-A neocon scumbag. The sexual assault allegations are b.s. imo, but you would have to be pretty damn stupid to want him on the SC.

Don't talk about the greatest most perfect president in history like that. This is r/conspiracy. We always support our president.

I agree with the stuff about his record coming out, and how he was involved with bush torture & patriot act type stuff.

The republicans had the votes though, and they backed those policies back then and I assume still do. It would be a legitimate bait & switch if the dems controlled the votes, and the republican's pushed a fake sex assault story to outrage everybody and distract.

​

In this case the distraction is rather meaningless.

The people who made the decision were fully aware of his voting record, is what I think that poster is trying to say. Our feelings about him don't really matter. Focusing on his record would not have persuaded republicans to not confirm him.

They get away with it by entirely fucking on social issues. The things that government is least responsible for and the least effective in controlling.

Anytime "liberal" is actually defined by these guys, it's ALWAYS about social/communism/economic freedom. Then when they really about liberals it's ALWAYS about how people feel on some edge issue about some minority.

It's the same with "conservative." They will ALWAYS define it in economic terms, but then ALWAYS refer to it in some social issue aspect.

So the democrats want him on the court?

If the democrates actually wanted him to fail, they wouldve simply stated this fact.

I hate this idea that democrats could have just said this and republicans would have voted no on him. Republicans voted yes on him specifically because of these things for fucks sake. Democrats would have just been listing off things republicans liked about him. Although it is true there are quite a few democrats that support the things Kav did.

I don't believe that. We are way too partisan for that right now. This was Trump's guy and that is all that people care about when it comes to supporting the stuff he does. You being a TDer should know that more than most. Trump has turned what should be serious discussions into something more akin to gameshows.

Don't get me wrong. I think there are a lot of people that saw through this guy and knew exactly what he stood for, but they aren't the ones calling in their opinions. Only the vocal minorities do that and like most minorities our government tends to ignore them.

Lots of people oppose it yes, but not enough for politicians to care about because they keep renewing it.

We shouldn't only limit our view to just who is running for president. Voting for our reps and senators is just as important. Without their support presidents can't do shit. Which is how it should be. Unfortunately we are so partisan right now that it is party before country, so even someone like Trump is supported by republican lawmakers. However, if enough people turn against them and make it difficult for them to get re-elected they might actually start caring what we think again. Same for dems.

A majority in US want changes to the Patriot Act:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/national-security/242383-poll-most-support-surveillance-reforms%3famp

How does that contradict what I just said? When there are enough of us that vote out people who keep renewing it then they'll care.

Kavanaugh wasn't Trumps "Trump's guy". He was the established right's pick way back in 2012. He was specifically mentioned by Romney and I think it was the New Yorker magazine that did a piece on Kavanaugh with the line "this is your next Supreme Court nominee if ANY Republican wins in 2011" I think Trump just picked him to throw a bone to the old guard, possibly for backing on the wall thing.

Kav was not on Trump's original list. I believe he was put on there because he has shown that he is favorable to Trump when it comes to legal issues he's likely to have. First and foremost that he is unlikely to agree that a sitting president can be subpoenaed, or that it should be wrong for a president to pardon himself.

That's way too hopeful. There's plenty people who will say "What's the problem if you ain't got something to hide?" and "What, you just gonna let the terrorists win?!" when it comes to the Patriot Act and its infringement on your rights.

Anything in the name of "national security".

The optimism you have for your fellow countrymen is endearing, but naive

The Democrats did say these things in the first hearing.

Let's be realistic here. The PATRIOT act passed 98-1 in the Senate, with many who supported it still serving. Any point about his involvement in the PATRIOT Act raised by senators would be countered swiftly by pointing out that those same Senators voted for it. As a line of attack, it would hurt the Democrats in the Senate, while not actually swaying Senate Republicans who also voted for the PATRIOT Act.

Both parties treat voters like shit and they equally make soap opera spin to dumbed down Americans that are to stupid or lazy to demand more from their representatives.

Yup, but only one of the parties puts fascists in high positions.

only one of the parties puts fascists in high positions.

If you think the democrats aren't in on this, you aren't paying attention.

How?

They're both corporate lackeys. They don't represent the will of the people, only the will of the few. But you keep voting for one or the other out of fear of the other. Just the fact that they won't let a 3rd party in the debates should be a wake up call of a failed democracy.

I'm not saying it's not a failed democracy, but the Koch's are only supporting one side.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't sew a silk purse out of a pig and a poke.

BS. Democrats are spineless but this is on the fundie cons. Go finish your borsch.

People who upvote these douchey and snarky partisan comments are exactly why good discussion rarely takes place here anymore

It's not a partisan comment. I believe there is a conspiracy that has taken hold of the Republican party whose aim is the downfall of 'big' government. And Republicans have placed Bannon and other avowed fascists in the Whitehouse, so I'm not really saying anything false. The Democrats I view as the lesser evil.

The Democrats I view as the lesser evil.

Which is the exact problem

Without compromises only downfall.

I'm sure the world would be much more pleasing if everyone could think Republicans are the good guys.

No one is saying that what so ever, nice straw man tho

You are saying it. Loudly I might add.

Trump has made this country so partisan

They all do it. Trump is doing it, but they have all done it for my entire life.

Trump cashed in on it. But don't kid yourself that this is a "Trump thing". It's a political thing and its been happening for a very long time.

There are no "good guys" here. They are all doing the same thing.

I didn't say it was unique to Trump. He just made it his primary goal it seems. We are more divided now they I've ever seen before.

We are more divided now they I've ever seen before.

I agree. I'm in my 40's and I have never seen this type of division before.

I blame the internet. And not jokingly.

Before the internet you could disagree but it would only happen on Thanksgiving and Birthdays. Now you can argue all year long 24/7. And not only with your family and in-laws, but with complete strangers.

Add to that the win/lose dichotomy that is the internet (likes / Upvotes vs. Downvotes / Followers / etc. )

It really takes pointless shit that 20 years ago you would have never heard of or cared about, and makes that shit not only in your face all day long, but makes you have to argue why you feel or think a specific way.

The more you argue it the more strong your opinion become.

Yah I would definitely agree that the internet has contributed to this. As well as the 24 hour news channels pumping out constant negative news. Not just negative about the president, but about everything. I think the competitiveness of our species is a big factor too. We have all these tools to be connected and we use them to divide into teams instead.

Not just negative about the president, but about everything.

I just witnessed this minutes ago.

A buddy of mine is overseas for work and posted a picture on Facebook. The picture got a few dozen likes and almost all the comments were all super anti-US and pro the country he is in. And the comments were made by Americans, and not kids, but by adult professionals in his company.

So he is on the left, he is always pissed off about everything going on, and his anger is constantly validated by all the people living in his phone. It's like a feedback loop.

I'm not saying that he has no reason to be pissed off. But I think people need time to digest and think about things. When everyone gets pissed off at the exact same time then everyone is being validated by everyone else every second, it just spins out of control.

20 years ago he would have gone to Europe, spent a week there, and made a phone call or two back to the states. And that phone call would have been telling his kids he loves them and catching up with his wife. Now his entire trip is just reiterating melodrama and overreactions.

It has to take its toll on people.

A huge part of me believes this was all theater. Both Dems and Republicans equally worked to create this theater. If the dems truly cared about the issue they would've brought it up to move independents, center right conservatives, and libertarians against Kav. But they didnt mention it because it's not the point.

Why would they bring it up? They where complicit in the Patriot Act.

Yup this is what i meant.

They didn't bring it up enough, but they did bring it up. He just didn't answer.

LMAO @ claiming that Trump has made this country partisan. Talk about living under a rock. My god, Trump derangement syndrome was a thing in the primaries and people marched on the street when he was elected. Liberals were bawling in convention centers all night and Hillary got so wasted and abusive she couldn't even concede like a functional human.

When Obama was elected liberals were bragging about how republicans would never again see the white house.

The partisan divide in this country has NOTHING - absolutely nothing - to do with Trump. Liberals have been engaging in hierarchical victim politics with incremental severity since 1985. Trump just so happens to be a guy in office right now when you notice it so of course you're going to attribute it to Trump.

The failure is yours. The failure to recognize the cultural degradation in real time. You're so far behind the horizon you may as well seek the sunrise behind you.

Edit: on top of that Trump has made this country

Simpleminded people make this country what it is. The idea that he was elected and influences them is circular logic. America sold a dream before it sold hope and it's full of dependents that can't feed themselves, all they can do is the chores assigned to them and steal if they aren't assigned any. American pride blinded americans into thinking they can all be specialists and the government would "do it's part" so they never have to adjust.

red october is the color of all stocks going negative and it's to lead up to another black friday where they pop the bubble on unbacked metals, auto loans, 401k, and suburban housing.

Want proof?
* Try to buy metals with a credit card, can't they advertise it but only want debit cards the past year. It's why banks are stocking up on metals at millions of tons a year since 2009 (some had none prior to this date).
* Try to get an auto loan using a credit card for the down payment. You used to but can't the past two years.
* Try to cash out your 401k. Unless you get your employers approval they won't accept "times of hardship" anymore.
* No such thing as urban housing, they got more than majority so taxes are skewed. Suburban was a bubble that didn't grow for 10 years but has some inflation still to deflate and collect remaining lands that didn't give into the last world order change. Rural land was commercialized by the farming industry.

last phase is upon us

Guns don't stop drones.

I literally just got my step-son a car a paid for the down payment with a credit card.

Just watch, the letter leak came from the Republicans. They steered the conversation from the start.

That would be a big play but I don't think so. I think the dems ran the story as late as possible to delay as long as absolutely possible. The dems are salty over the way Obama's pick fell apart at the end of his presidency. (Rightfully so, in my opinion) so they are choosing to fling political shit back at them. They wanted the process to take as long as humanly possible to get to the midterms hopefully. It obviously didn't work but that was their objective.

Also: he ruled on the Snowden leaks “the Government’s metadata collection program is entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment.”

Memos also passed over his desk (though he denies ever seeing them) okaying the use of torture during the Bush administration.

But no clearly his partying in college is what was most important to discuss with the senate.

Source: https://fee.org/articles/the-constitutional-reasons-to-oppose-kavanaugh-for-the-supreme-court/

there's more that I can remember vaguely but do not have a source for off the top of my head. I will keep searching.

In my own opinion yes but I certainly know what you mean ...

You could have done some research on Kavanaugh's views and his past and found this out for yourself. Or, if you had watched his first confirmation hearing and not just the one on Dr. Ford's testimony, you would have learned this. Sen. Leahy in particular brought these issues up strongly during his questioning period.

The sad fact is, though this community cares quite a bit about issues like Domestic Surveillance and Torture (depending on the thread), the bulk of the American people do not. The Democrats, after not finding success or traction with calling out his positions on Roe v. Wade, torture, domestic surveillance, corporatism, executive privilege, or executive power, went with what they thought was going to be their next best play, which was weaponizing the sexual assault allegations.

Overall, maybe the Dems are no better than the GOP. I agree that both parties are completely corrupt. On the single issue of confirming Brett Kavanaugh, they were better though. On broader issues of domestic surveillance, I don't think Dems can claim they're good overall, especially not elected Dems, but if you look at the people who have been fighting it hardest, most come from the far left-wing base, and they have been slowly working on reforming the Dem party. Whatever resistance to these issues there was among the right-wing base has pretty much been pacified or co-opted the same way the Tea Party was.

Both parties are bad, yes, but there were legit reasons why Kavanaugh should not have been voted in which takes the Democrats off the hook here.

The GOP didn't have the votes for kav... they were at 48-49. Then the dems did their circus sideshow and brought in their CIA shrink to do a blatantly bad stage production and it sealed the deal.

The republican base are not neo-cons. The people are not on board. If the democrats would have held up congress and talked about issues people care about, like the surveillance state and rendition, I guarantee there wouldn't have been 1 democrat voting for kav and at least a couple in the GOP dissenting as well. And, that would have primed them as the party who will stand up for the people and they would have won the midterms.

But, they paraded ridiculous sexual misconduct allegations and completely ruined any of their credibility, destroying any chance of a blue wave. Now, the GOP will get almost 60 senate seats and a super-majority in the house come midterms. Trump will preside over the most cohesive government in 100 years. And it's the democrat's fault, they took a dive this time around.

The Dems did talk about the surveillance state and rendition, and executive power and executive privilege. People, especially the republican base, didn't give a shit. Sexual misconduct allegations were their next best play after everything else they tried didn't work.

Just fucking LOL.

Link to them bringing those up? I watched the fuck out of Cspan and they just whined about not having enough time to review the documents and then they went on and on about how he couldn't release his clerk documents and then the sexual assault allegations. The only legal opinion questions they asked were related to whether or not a sitting president can be indicted, which almost all juris agree: no, but he refused to answer if memory serves. If you can find a video of a Democrat grilling him about the surveillance state or the patriot act, please, make me eat crow.

https://youtu.be/8MkyxSyUf9o?t=12734

Good on senator Durbin for touching on it... But he's not really holding him to task on any particular policy opinions, he's just trying to catch him in an inconsistency. When it didn't stick, he then moves onto abortion rights for illegal immigrants and then the right to unionize for illegal immigrants.

I can see the crow, it's looking tasty, but you've not compelled me to eat it... Even if that one question were a strong attempt at holding the then judge accountable for opinions on rendition, and it's not, it would be a drop in the ocean.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4748064/sen-leahy-questions-kavanaugh-surveillance

Ah yeah I saw this one live. Senator Leahy is "just curious." they do get to the point of agreeing that technology and data collection will soon come to the point of requiring a warrant, Kavanaugh gives the satisfactory explanation that he believes Supreme Court decision is developing in that direction.

So far, you've brought me two good questions that were asked, about 2 minutes out of some, what, 50 hours?

I think that where we agree is that senators had quite a lot of material relating to the 4th amendment that they could have built pressure on... I've contended that the democrats did not adequately press on those issues, you seemingly disagree and I look forward to you providing more evidence of such as I do find cspan clips to be quite interesting. If you're right, and democrats did do a great job at bringing these issues front and center, does that mean the news media failed to cover it?

I absolutely think the media failed to cover it. Before the sexual assault allegations they were mostly concentrated on the 'process' of it, going a bit into Roe V. Wade as well as Kavanaugh's potential role in any Supreme Court questions that may come from the Mueller investigation, basically questions of executive privilege and power.

Committee Democrat spent so much time bitching about releasing documents precisely because most of Kavanaugh's work for the Bush Administration are sealed in that.

Abortion has never been less popular than it is now. It's a very common legal opinion that a sitting president must be impeached and removed from office before he's indicted. There is no question that the president can shut down a DOJ- appointed special council. The spying programs are bipartisan, originally authorized under Bush, but expanded on under Obama; Obama spent untold trillions developing the surveillance infrastructure. The USA freedom act or whatever is just the patriot act that conscripts the help of social media and isps; it strengthened the surveillance state, it didn't weaken it.

So, all these are no-wins for the democrats... Unless they dug their toes in and pushed against the surveillance state and the provisioning of war powers. But they didn't. Maybe some democrats began to touch on it and that's when Feinstein and the neo-libs, fully supported by the media machine, had to bring out the circus to distract? If that's the case, the democrats need someone to come in and completely take the party over like trump did with the gop... Because the way this confirmation was handled assures the midterms are going to be very ugly for the democrats and trump will preside over the most cohesive government any of us have seen in our lives.

I agree with quite a bit of that. (Though abortion still has 69% who favor its being legal). I actually agree that elected Dems, especially Feinstein, don't have a whole lot of credibility on the issue of domestic surveillance. Democrats do need someone (or even better, people) to come in and completely take over the party. I'm personally part of that effort. I think on the left though, if we're able to be successful, we need to do it in a way that's permanent. With Trump and the Republicans, I see a whole lot of "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" going on, as evidenced by Brett Kavanaugh and by Gina Haspel.

Trump never contended to be a foreign policy expert and I can't disagree with you regarding the way he's handling certain military industrial institutions... But he's in open war with the IC, which is a great threat to the military industrial complex (which is the old name for the "deep state"), providing it's not all just kabuki. He's leading a party that is now doing stuff like this: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5404/text

When trump does have a strong majority in the senate and a super-majority in the house next month, I hope that we see more economic reforms and then a total reform of our IC. Considering that the IC's foundation was built to secure our economic interests, it's hard to imagine we could reform one without the other. You're in this sub, so you ought to know that there's a lot of evidence that our military industrial complex was completely compromised by Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Obama with the intention to destroy American sovereignty and usher in a one-world government. So, my hope is that trump is really fighting against that but my fear is that he's the anti Christ, here to bring us into the tribulations. Either way, the democrats have been instrumental in bringing trump into power. Their shady deals and plans helped him get the republican nomination, those plans were exposed (those pesky Russians!) which probably contributed to him getting elected, and now their ridiculous demonstrations are handing him a cohesive congress... So, even if my fears are correct and trump is the anti-Christ, the democrats put him in power, not the Republicans.

Republicans voted for him. They put him into power. Blaming the Democrats for putting Trump into power is like blaming a rape victim for wearing a short dress.

Pied piper strategy at least contributed. And guess what, all my friends are registered democrats. They all voted for trump because they were disgusted by the Hillary campaign.

I too was disgusted by the Hillary campaign. Many were. Still, as terrible as she is, she has a right to run for President if she wants to and try to earn votes, same as Trump. Democrats, unfortunately, chose Hillary. There were a plethora of candidates Republicans could have chosen in that primary. They chose Trump.

Partly due to Hillary's pied piper strategy. Many people voted for trump precisely to spite Hillary. I would say that a significant portion of voters didn't vote for trump but rather against Hillary.

That's what they tell themselves, but they voted for Trump. I did vote Hillary in the end, and a lot of the reason why I did was because Trump had more dealbreakers than she did (Which blew my mind. I didn't think it possible). If I wanted to avoid personal responsibility for what I did, I could tell myself that my vote was more against Trump than for Hillary, but that's not the way votes are counted. I pushed the box on the touchscreen for Hillary. I voted for Hillary. I hated doing it and after coming home for the day, I drunk myself silly, but I did it.

I didn't vote. I hid in Japan until it was sure Hillary wasn't going to be president.

Sen. Leahy in particular brought these issues up strongly during his questioning period. It's not the left's fault you didn't know this shit.

Yep. Because he was lied to back when Kavanaugh was going for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. This information was out there but most of what I saw out of this sub from either couple month old donald users or leftists accounts were he said she said over the sexual allegations.

Yea, the info was out there, not sure what's up with OP. Alot of ppl were against Kavanaugh simply because he believed in unlimited executive powers.

Yes the info is out there but you overestimate how much most people in the world actually know and research shit like this.

Trump appointed the CIA director and fired the FBI director to appoint a new one and r/conspiracy turns a blind eye to suck his dick.

It didn't concern them. The Patriot Act helps all of them.

So far every claim that Kavanaugh is a fascist or wrote the Patriot act that I've seen has been bupkis. Please show me the information that outs Kavanaugh as anything you claim. Because so far, the rulings he's made in regards to the 4th amendment appear to be inline with long established judicial precedent that otherwise places the onus of change on the Congress to pass laws to change 3rd party doctrine.

The lecture clip here by Judge Napolitano is helpful: https://mises.org/power-market/judge-napolitano-kavanaugh-enemy-4th-amendment

I appreciate the link. It's hearsay by Napolitano. There's nothing substantiative there. I'm currently reviewing the link provided by r/aetheradept if you want to keep an eye on that for a rebuttal. One is forthcoming as soon as I can put it together.

Yes, I’ve seen this before. The gist of it was that Kavanaugh put the onus on the Congress to change current laws. INAL, so bear with me as I attempt provide excerpts as well as my understanding of them allows.

Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion in this case, abridged by me:

The Bivens doctrine allows parties to maintain certain constitutional tort suits against federal officers in their individual capacities, even in the absence of an express congressionally created cause of action. The classic Bivens case entails a suit alleging an unreasonable search or seizure by a federal officer in violation of the Fourth Amendment. See Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Since Bivens, however, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to extend the implied Bivens cause of action to new contexts. The Court has emphasized that it is ordinarily Congress’s role, not the Judiciary’s, to create and define the scope of federal tort remedies. As the Court has explained, Bivens carved out only a narrow exception to that bedrock separation of powers principle. Here, Meshal proceeded under Bivens because Congress has not created a cause of action for his alleged injury. As the Court today spells out, Congress has enacted a number of related tort causes of action. For example, the Federal Tort Claims Act provides a cause of action for torts committed by federal officials. But that law exempts torts committed in a foreign country. So it does not help Meshal. The Torture Victim Protection Act provides a cause of action for torture committed by foreign officials. But the statute exempts U.S. officials, a point that President George H.W. Bush stressed when signing the legislation in 1992.

...Other courts of appeals have refused to recognize Bivens actions for alleged conduct that occurred during national security investigations, even for conduct that occurred in U.S. territory. See Lebron v. Rumsfeld, 670 F.3d 540 (4th Cir. 2012); Arar v. Ashcroft, 585 F.3d 559 (2d Cir. 2009); see also Vance v. Rumsfeld, 701 F.3d 193 (7th Cir. 2012).

...If I were a Member of Congress, I might vote to enact a new tort cause of action to cover a case like Meshal’s. But as judges, we do not get to make that decision. For those reasons, I respectfully disagree with the dissent and fully join the Court’s opinion.

I would reverse the judgment dismissing Meshal’s case and remand for further proceedings for the following two reasons:

• First, congressional action supports a constitutional damages claim where, as here, it would not intrude on the unique disciplinary structure of the military and where there is no comprehensive regulation or alternative remedy in place; and

• Second, where FBI agents arbitrarily detain a United States citizen overseas and threaten him with disappearance and death during months of detention without charges, those agents’ mere recitation of foreign policy and national security interests does not foreclose a constitutional damages remedy.

....and Kavanaugh goes on to expound on the ideas antithetical to judicial activism on matters that in his opinion are better handled Congress enacting legislation to long standing (+26 years) limitations in laws.

Again, I'm not a lawyer. Please continue to attempt to change my mind on the matter.

Silly human, you have misspelled completly. It's actually spelled completely. Don't mess it up again!

Torture is both unconstitutional and illegal under international law.

But Meshal wasn't tortured. Detained, yes. Threatened with torture, yes. Tortured no.

Amir Meshal, a U.S. citizen who was secretly and unlawfully detained in 2007 by FBI agents in three African countries for four months. The agents threatened Meshal with torture, disappearance, and death unless he admitted terrorism connections — which he consistently denied. He was finally brought home to the United States and never charged with a crime.

The patriot act is completly unconstitutional.

I agree with you. But the case referenced in the link that you provided was made by Meshal using the Bivens Doctrine (1971) to which Kavanaugh pointed out that:

the Federal Tort Claims Act( provides a cause of action for torts committed by federal officials. But that law exempts torts committed in a foreign country. So it does not help Meshal. The Torture Victim Protection Act provides a cause of action for torture committed by foreign officials. But the statute exempts U.S. officials, a point that President George H.W. Bush stressed when signing the legislation in 1992.

The laws referenced by Kavanaugh predate the Patriot Act.

What you have, is a mafia essentially. They are compromising the supreme court

I respectfully disagree.

So whats with the video of the judge guy saying he helped write the patriot act?

That's Judge Napolitano. Other than the youtube I can't find anything on it.

Basically paints a picture of him being a rubberstamper

Possibly, but I think the key point is that Congress authorized the President to conduct a war on terrorism and so far has yet to revoke it. This is the context in which Kavanaugh has been ruling on national security issues in a state of war. States of war have always given Presidents wide latitude to infringe certain rights in favor of national security. I'm pretty sure Kavanaugh can't rule that war powers enacted by Congress are unconstitutional because the constitutional expressly gives Congress the power to authorize war.

I went into this thread with the idea that I would be open minded enough read anything you wanted to present in an attempt to change my mind on the matter.

We will agree to disagree on the matter.

You sure did.

His opponents had been talking about it for weeks/months, though. Even the likes of /r/politics had posts on the matter.

Just because you're banned from a sub doesn't mean you can't view it's contents. On top of that you can use your favorite search engine and lean about the candidate at your leisure. Just because you were unaware doesn't mean others are.

But here's a secret. It didn't matter what issues Dems brought up. The GOP controlled legislative and executive branch was going to push through their GOP controlled scrooge so they can also control the judicial branch.

Seems like the politics sub isn't that bad after all. Maybe they are trying to protect citizens instead of sycophantically following a phoney leader and his cronies. People there are allowed to talk about all sides but propaganda and trolling do get down voted because views that aren't based on propaganda from 4chan are not appreciated. And, I get it, "MSM is all lying! Just a bunch of SJWs trying to make your kids gay and the pizza is molesting my children" but maybe this crap is being yelled out by people who don't want you to listen to all sides of the story. Maybe the side that told you Chad Chadvanaugh is a strict constitutionalist didn't want you know that he irreparably damaged the 4th Amendment for all citizens. Maybe the side yelling about fake news actually wants to limit the 1st Amendment so you don't have the educated and informed story. You don't need to accept everything you read but maybe you should do a little more research on both sides of a story before accepting it. This is why the Left lost. They didn't see the alt-right propaganda machine coming before it was too late. If this government cared a dime about its citizens it wouldn't tell people that everything that doesn't conform to their narrative is fake news.

“Beliefs are dangerous. Beliefs allow the mind to stop functioning. A non-functioning mind is clinically dead. Believe in nothing.” ― Maynard James Keenan

This comment makes me laugh so fucking much.

ikr.

He didn't write the PATRIOT ACT. That is actual fake news.

Agree but...

In Klayman v. Obama, Judge Kavanaugh went out of his way to set out theories to defend the suspicionless surveillance of the American public that surprised even conservative legal scholars. The case challenged the constitutionality of the National Security Agency's bulk collection of telephone metadata collection program, a program that collected call records of millions of Americans. Judge Kavanaugh issued an opinion in a decision to deny plaintiffs' emergency petition for rehearing en banc and determined that the government's "bulk collection of telephony data" is "entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment." He set out two justifications: (1) the third-party doctrine, and (2) national security. The opinion was surprising because the denial of a petition for a rehearing en banc is a procedural matter, and rarely calls for an opinion by one of the panel members. In issuing an opinion as Judge Kavanaugh did, he not only broke with tradition but also set out views in defense of post 9-11 surveillance that no judge had previously stated. Judge Kavanaugh's tendency to elevate national security over individual privacy, in this case and broadly, may jeopardize important privacy protections established by the Supreme Court's Fourth Amendment precedents.

Read his actual statement. What you are saying is way off. He clearly states that the lower courts have no authority to make any other ruling because the interpretation of "unreasonable" in the 4th amendment already has precedent from the Supreme Court. He was a cog in the legal machine doing his job, not some renegade judge as you imply.

Not WE. You. motherfuckers.

Ever heard of New World Order? Wonder why W. was running around calling all his favors in.

I can't believe (yes I can) that r/conspiracy is so Trumpish now.

I guess what I really can't understand is why anyone believes anything Trump says. And this isn't a Repub vs Dem thing, where one is right, and another wrong.

I can say with certainty that both sides lie. Both sides can be corrupt. I have a blind spot for Bernie, but I can also point to decades of decisions he has made that I approve of, and that he says what he means without obfuscation.

But Trump. There is nothing anyone can point to that backs up anything he says. It's all nonsense.

Both sides can be corrupt

Both sides are corrupted. FTFY.

I was trying to be nice and say maybe there are still some Mr. Smiths (besides Bernie. :P) on both sides.

But fuck it. Money & power corrupts.

They were also both in on the Patriot Act. Of course, the dems don't want to draw attention to it...

The White House would not release the documentation of Kavanaugh's legal record.

There are other claims about his perjury to the Senate committee both for his earlier appointment and the most recent appointment.

You can't just now be learning about this, right?

If word that he helped write the Patriot Act (sic) got out, neither side would have supported him.

I'm a conservative but registered as an independent mostly because republicans as far back as Bush jr (maybe earlier) refuse to take action against the flood of illegals.

Another thing that's always bothered me about republicans is the Patriot Act. Not an expert by any means but from what I know about it, it's an aggressive intrusion into our personal lives. From the TSA to the NSA and all the other alphabet agencies in between, we have very little personal freedom left.

So if I knew about K's track record there is no way I would have supported him.

You got bait and switched. Many of us have been watching this circus clown rodeo with gritted teeth for far too long. Good morning.... how does it feel to be awake?

Also, a HUG for you. It's a depressing and disgusting rabbit's hole, but I urge you to learn and uncover the truths on your own. No one can be told what is truth... to understand it. They have to discover it on their own.

Don't forget to come up for air every once and awhile. Take a week off and ride a bicycle. Clear your mind. We are all human. We all make mistakes. And we are all in this together <3

How many democrats currently in the senate voted for the patriot act and iraq war? Why would they use that as a talking point when they continuously vote for it?

Do you ever notice when Republicans do something nakedly reprehensible like putting an a young, authoritarian, corporate shilling asshole like Kavanaugh on the supreme court, it's always somehow the Democrats fault? If only the Democrats hadn't made us do bad things! Why didn't they save us with their 48 of 52 votes?

It's fucking pathetic. Own up to your mistakes and learn from them.

You got played.

Again.

You know you misspelled completly. It's actually spelled completely. Don't mess it up again!

I liked trump because he spoke the truth

When did this happen? I don't think that's something he's done even once. He even openly admitted at a rally that he just says whatever makes people scream" WHOOOOOI!"

You know how the crowd reacted? They all yelled "WHOOOOO!!"

Man I had a whole like 10k word rant that I realized I was losing the plot on, written out, but as one of those vaguely white looking hispanic invaders, I get it, there's a lot of problems facing your demographic, a lot of anxiety about where the country is headed and the impact technologies being developed right now are going to have on you.

But Trump never told you the truth, he just told you what you needed to hear in order to get you to vote for him.

Just as a small example, and I know you're not going to like it the second you see her name, but try to keep a level head here, but Clinton was right on coal, it's dead, has been dying since we figured out how to get oil out of the ground and will die even faster the more wind farms and solar panels get installed. In one of the debates it got brought up and she straight up said that.

But she also said that she had a plan to get the people dependant on that industry to change gears and adapt, get them to learn the skills that would translate into living in the 21st century(most of it tech related)

And Trump said, wrong. Everyone cheered and then when he got in he seemingly did right by those coal miners and give billions of the rest of the countries tax money to them.

But that's not going to save that industry, it's just delaying the inevitable and causing long term damage not just to those communities that he robbed of a chance to adapt to the coming changes but the opportunity cost of putting that money into coal instead of something actually useful, like say educating children on how to program so they can control the magic we've created in the last 50 years.

That's not making America great again, I don't give a fuck how conservative you are or how liberal I am, that's just stupidity winning out because of fear.

Virtually every single fucking thing the man has said has been a lie, and fuck it gets me mad to see good men and women duped by it, because it's obvious to me from the outside looking in and pretty much every argument I've had with conservative leaning people always devolves into shit flinging because these are hard problems facing not just you, but everyone on this planet.

The next 50 years are going to see an upheaval in all kinds of ways and the country that should be LEADING the rest of the world on fucking CRUSHING those problems decided to elect a man who would make it worse whether through incompetence, malice or outright apathy.

Now do I think he's a monster? No, he's just a guy doing the human thing and taking advantage of any opportunity given to him to further his own goals, but those goals don't better the country and certainly won't better your own situation.

If you read all that, sorry, was a bit of a mess, I'm just another retard pissing into the same sea of piss every other retard pisses into, but I can understand where the White Christian American comes from when they said they voted for Trump. It was just a dumbass move I think.

You ate up the propaganda man, not hating, everyone is affected by it, but she wasn't going to take away your guns, ban christianity, and sell out 'info in her closet'. The only way to get a guy like trump to win is a giant propaganda push to make the opposition feel like a monster. She is so far from my first pick, but she is not the boogeyman everyone here thinks.

kavanaugh is a PRO LIFE warrior of humanity -- he'll do great on the SC. stop believing the propaghanda

Trump can't do much of anything without Republican backing. The only choices he gets to make on anyone that requires the senate's approval are from a short list that they provide him with or it's no deal. You may not hear or see much about them but the neo-cons are still a strong presence with hard-liners like Bolton and Kavanaugh still getting put in key positions.

Sure he can nominate anyone he chooses but what good is it if the majority of republicans are going to reject whoever that is as to show him who's actually in charge as would the Dems simply out of hand and out of sheer spite?

The President may be the head of state, but he doesn't have unlimited authority. He has to go along with the majority to get anything done.

You saw how the republican party refused to financially support his run for the presidency after winning at the convention and the inordinate number of top people in the party who were still critical and unsupportive even though he won the nomination fair and square and even going so far as to tell people that they were going to vote for Clinton rather than him.

Neither side likes or genuinely wanted him. The republicans are determined to control him while the Dems simply want him out any way that it can be arranged.

At the rate Trump's going he'll be lucky to fill the list of appointments he has to make before the next presidential election rolls around.

Knowing Trump, I wouldn't be at all surprised if wasn't part of a deal or a trade of some kind where he agreed to put Kavanaugh forward and throw his weight behind him in exchange for something else he wanted that the party may not have been too keen on supporting.

If you ever gave Trump any credibility it's not the first time you've been played for an idiot.

Oh true. Sorry I wasn't saying you were an idiot, but you were taken in by a con man. We get ripped of and misled all the time. It's happened to me several times. Con men con, it's what they do. As you say the best thing we can do is learn from our mistakes. Actually the other thing you can do is hold your nose and vote democrat in November, because I think American democracy might depend on it.

Dude, I'm not here to try and lecture you on politics, and I totally get the appeal of libertarians, but most of them are full of shit as well. In a modern, infrastructure-heavy society it's a pipe dream - It's just a way of selling the worst aspects of capitalism and neoliberalism to the masses.

And i am certainly not a fan of 'the lesser of two evils' politics but the two party system practically forces that. let's face it if you don't vote for one of the two parties the other wins out. And I genuinely believe that left unchecked the GOP will turn the US into a Russia-style kleptocracy within a few election cycles

I was listening to Dan Carlin's series on WWI a while ago and what struck me was the sheer logistics involved in modern war (and when I say modern it's 100+ years old now). Organising a modern society is no different and you simply need some central infrastructure, control and planning to make it work. Like I said I think that to expect private business to self-regulate in a libertarian utopia for the 'greater good' is a pipe dream. Private business given the opportunity will tend towards the greatest profit at the expense of all else, and also tends towards monopolies. Again, like I said, I think the whole concept of libertarianism, the individual and profit as paramount, is simply unworkable in a modern country with hundreds of millions of people. Like it or not both the US and Western Europe are social democracies and have done pretty well under that system post-WW2 and again as I said I think the whole concept is a way to sell a fatally imbalanced system, which allows impossibly wealthy individuals to accrue even more wealth and power, to the masses who realistically will be at the sharp end of it.

Theres no reason the government cant do these things yet still allow people their rights to free expression and to live life without being pushed around by the state.

I can't disagree with you there, but shysters like Paul Rand have consistently shown themselves to be as bad as the rest of 'em.

Profit is completely irrelevant to Libertarianism. It's core tenets are individual freedom and the NAP. All Libertarianism is saying about profit (self-interest) is that it's the highest incentive for action and risk taking. Even the regulators that you propose to regulate are driven by self-interest, not the public's well being.

The way you describe it is a sort of individualistic anarchism which I maintain is fundamentally incompatible with large modern societies.

Not necessarily. It could be minarchism.

Oh sorry, not anarchism, minianarchism!

Sounds like a Lovecraftian nightmare

Keep chopping down that tree, you might see the forest.

Likewise

The high level of upvotes on these comments that are basically long ways to say “support the system. You have no choice” is v disturbing. TMoR

More of a response to the demonstrably false 'all sides are equally as bad' and the lame libertarian shtick that gets posted here I would think.

Are all sides not equally bad? Trump supports bigotry, racism, sexism, rape culture. Obama supports mass surveillance, destruction of privacy, mass pollution (see bills he wrote and passed as senator), Wall St, income inequality, drone assassinations, imprisoning whistle blowers, and bombing civilians. Tell me which side is objectively worse- at this point it’s just a matter of opinion and which poison you personally think tastes the worst.

There's compelling evidence that Trump.org has been a criminal enterprise for decades, indulging in fraud, money laundering, tax evasion and stiffing customers and contractors. There's compelling evidence that he's influenced if not outright controlled by a hostile foreign power. He's a compulsive liar. He's divisive, supports far right hate groups and fascists at home and vile dictators abroad. He continually condemns the free press. He has filled government departments with know-nothing apparatchiks that are actively trying to destroy the agencies they are in charge of. He's potentially set the country (if not the world) back decades by withdrawing the US from the Paris climate accord. He is alienating America's traditional allies and is destabilising the entire postwar settlement. He's waging a needless economic war that will hurt American consumers, and he's still in bed with Wall Street, weakening post-financial-crisis legislation. Yes, he is glaringly, ball achingly, objectively worse than Obama.

Ugh you sound like a baby boomer orTMOR.

I sound like a baby boomer? Jesus fucking Christ.

I'm actually very impressed that someone made it this deep into his presidency and has woken up. Welcome back to the other side. You won't get any judgment from me and I think Trump is literally the Antichrist. Actually gives me some hope.

You sound like an actual patriot and not just someone who pretends to be one because they belong to the dominant social group and they're scared of losing their position. I don't blame anyone for voting for him, there was no real choice and that was the point.

I'm afraid we are to the tipping point and things are about to get out of control faster than anyone realizes. I'm just happy to hear someone changed their minds. Now please speak your point of view to your former allies. We need to turn this ship if possible. We are headed for an iceberg.

Don’t blame the parties or “the system” blame yourselves. You should’ve done your own research. There were loads of articles out there about he has a very narrow interpretation of 4A. That’s why people are so worried about Roe. So many people got caught up “defending their side” and that’s no one’s fault but their own.

Lol, this was discussed ad nauseum on this board. Just because you weren't paying attention doesn't mean the rest of us weren't.

Everyone here knows about it. Maybe you spent too much time somewhere else. A place where people blindly support a certain someone?

Lies

The top of the Republican Party has been fascist going back generations. If you follow the Bush family history you see a long play, schemes, spying, assassinations, abuse of power, fake wars, fake boogeymen. Most Republicans aren't fascist but those at the top are. They use good people to support the worst of humanity all wraped up with Jesus and flags.

good people

source needed

Anybody have mainstream media citation that he helped write the Patriot Act? Having a hard time explaining this to a normie.

I was wondering why my searches were showing nothing

Using privacy mode in your browser I believe it gets around this. But still I agree you have to be careful nowadays

Kavanaugh is the definition of a swamp creature. He is the exact opposite of what anyone here or anywhere should want in a SCOTUS pick, regardless of what your affiliation is. Indeed, the entire list the Federalist Society gave to Trump of people he had to choose from (once again showing that Trump is no different than any other swamp politician, no matter how much he tries to convince people otherwise) is all establishment to the core.

Ahh when Biden McCain and Kavanaugh were coworkers...

For decades, one of the central planks of conservatism is that laws are changed through elections, not biased "judicial activism."

Trumpism has tossed that out in less than two years, with Kavanaugh openly airing his biases on national TV, and the entire Republican party just shrugging.

Because the Republican party literally doesn't stand for anything other than themselves and staying in power. Trump has exposed them for who they really are. This whole God loving, patriotic, moral majority, personal accountability bullshit is a total farce. It's reaction formation. They're all entitled narcissists who can NEVER actually take personal responsibility for anything. It's always the dems fault.

The 3 day news cycle doesn't acknowledge news from 3 weeks ago let along 16 years ago..

Lol as a liberal no one was planning this.. But if you see a problem with this you can work to aid the situation. I won't berate you for your decisions cuz I think that's stupid, but at what point are we all gonna pick up the pieces..?

I just wanted to give the liberal perspective, honestly you don't seem married to any political party-- and I respect that. I agree it's divide and conquer politics that's popular right now, but I think that works cuz they know something.. No one wants to be the first one to do something. Everyone will wait for everyone else to change before they bother, and so nothing actually ends up changing. Yeah I wonder sometimes if there's a way to divide the legal system of the U.S. like that, but I think it might just divide the country completely

Yep. George W. Bush was making calls to undecided Senators, trying to get them support him. We'll see how he rules on key issues related to the Deep State, but I don't have especially high hopes for him. If anything, he likely be another Justice Roberts.

Kavenaugh was with Starr in the Clinton..Lewinsky deal, and had first hand info on the vince foster murder. he did not pursue it, yet that would have brought down the clintons and the top of the DNC. so K followed orders and let it alone. BUT he carries with him the knowledge serious crimes occur at the top and are covered. How will that turn out ?

Welcome to the party, pal.

What's this we shit? Anyone who didn't buy into the partisan bullshit was talking his pissing all over the fourth amendment and due process and the threat he poses to net neutrality.

Yea man. The media also have trump 24/7 coverage to get him elected. Total bait and switch since day 1. Capital will accumulate infinitely more capital.

Ego is one hell of a hurdle. Most never overcome it.

"I cant believe i was so easily fooled by Trump"

Ummmm

The guy is a con man? He doesn't give a shit about anyone unless they're rich.

op is a _ _ _ _ _

If it makes you feel any better, Trump had almost nothing to do with this. Kavanaugh was selected by the Federalist Society, and the people pushing hardest for his appointment were Republican senators.

Well, let me add caveats...I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but FWIW:

• Trump selected Kavanaugh from a list compiled by the Federalist Society, and it's widely understood that any Republican president would have selected their nominees the same way. There's been some speculation that Trump might have been attracted to Kavanaugh's loose view of presidential power, but it could just as easily be true that Trump didn't scrutinize the list very hard.
• Trump got super gung-ho about Kavanaugh a few days after the Ford hearing, but for a day or two there he was pretty low-key about it compared to Republican senators like Lindsay Graham and Orrin Hatch, who were already screaming at Democrats within hours of Ford's testimony. Personally I think Trump saw that the hellfire and brimstone approach was working and he jumped on the bandwagon
• My personal read of the situation is that Trump would have been perfectly fine discarding Kavanaugh and picking another name from the list, as long as he got someone, but Congressional republicans wanted to jam him through to avoid a backlash from their base in November. I think the senators care a lot more about midterms than Trump, basically. But I could be totally wrong, and Trump could be pulling a lot more strings from behind the curtain than I think.

You have a source on him "writing" it, or just more hysteria?

How exactly were you "fooled by Trump?"

Uh-huh. But that doesn't answer my question. How did Trump "fool" you?

I did look at the link, sir. Again: How do you feel fooled by Trump? Did Trump make an untrue statement regarding Kavanaugh's record? You're not connecting the dots here. I'm going to be honest with you: I don't believe you were ever a true Trump supporter. I think you are either trolling, or a bit hysterical.

Trump's support team said Chad Chadvanaugh would be a strict constitutionalist even though he already wasn't. Trump wouldn't know what Amendments are so he just said Chad is a cool dude and totally innocent. Even more simple, Trump nominated this guy which tells the people he is the best person for the job. He fooled the citizens so he could turn the swing vote into a partisan hack who things president is above the law.

Trump's support team said

Not Trump

Trump wouldn't know what Amendments are so he just said

Making a baseless assumption

Trump nominated this guy which tells the people he is the best person

That's one interpretation of many

He fooled the citizens so he could turn the swing vote into a partisan hack

Cool, did he tell this to you personally or are you just a sheep parroting more CNN drivel?

Okay, so Trump nominated an inferior candidate? He didn't nominate the best person for the job?

There are many reasons one might be selected for a job.. being the best is one of them. Let me ask you, have you ever hired anyone before? If so, then know there are many other perfectly legitimate (and legal) reasons someone other than whom you personally feel is "the best" might get selected for a job. It might be due to availability, it might be that no one else on the hiring committee supported your ideal pick. Just a couple examples. My point is, Trump's actions cannot be used to draw absolute conclusions from.

I know. He chose him because of his stance on the absolute power of the president and his ability to be above the law. Also, Chad Chadvanaugh doesn't belief in the 4th Amendment so will most likely bend on all the amendments. He is the best judge for Trump not the best person for the job. Don't worry, I get you are trying to justify why you support Trump but those hoops you are jumping threw must be getting smaller and smaller.

Don't worry, I get you are trying to justify why you support Trump but those hoops you are jumping threw must be getting smaller and smaller.

Interesting, how so?

He chose him because of his stance on the absolute power of the president and his ability to be above the law

doesn't belief in the 4th Amendment so will most likely bend on all the amendments

He is the best judge for Trump not the best person for the job

Really. More baseless assumptions, and I'm the one jumping "threw" ever-diminishing hoops? I'm not trying to be rude, but if you are going to engage in civil discourse, at least argue based on factual statements, rather than forcing your wildly illogical emotionally-charged conclusions based on radical leftist talking points.

Sorry, you are saying he was not the best person for the job and I agree. I am proposing a few reasons why a president under immense legal scrutiny would choose a judge for such a position. A position that will definitely be deciding on Trump's fate. A position that won't even have to recuse himself. So you can see why a judge that ascribes to Democratic conspiracy theories and the bending of the Constitution would a favored pick. Also, Trump picked him even though many other Republicans didn't want him because they knew the confirmation would be very iffy because of his shady past. And if you think the radical left is getting emotional, it is because the right threw away rational discourse a long time ago.

you are saying he was not the best person for the job

Take a moment and reread what I said...because that was not it

why a president under immense legal scrutiny would choose a judge for such a position

What?

A position that won't even have to recuse himself

Again..what?

So you can see why a judge that ascribes to Democratic conspiracy theories and the bending of the Constitution would a favored pick

????

Trump picked him even though many other Republicans didn't want him because they knew the confirmation would be very iffy because of his shady past

Perhaps I should just copy and paste the words "baseless assumptions" over and over at this point? Again, where are your facts? How do you presume to know what the president is thinking, along with the entire Republican contingent of congress?

And if you think the radical left is getting emotional

They are

it is because the right threw away rational discourse a long time ago

Again with no supporting evidence for your claims.

Based on your responses I sense an undeveloped worldview. Just a kindly suggestion. You are on a conspiracy sub so I assume you are naturally curious. QUESTION everything you read. Always consider the source and dig as much as you can. Don't accept what CNN/MSNBC/ABC/FOX tells you is so, or your friends, or your social studies teacher. QUESTION everything. Take NOTHING at face value.

You have learned well. Spin and deny. I don't have sources from brietbart or 4chan to back up my statements so you won't believe then anyway so why waste my time. The dominoes are falling in the Mueller Investigation and which will end up in the supreme court unless there are some serious resignations. Just because you deny all the mounting evidence, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And to be honest, I am just fucking with you. I know everything I write will be countered by some non-answer, I just like to see how far someone is willing to take it. Your behavior patterns are the same as many others. Disappointing, really. Would be nice to be proven wrong and have an actual conversation instead of just propaganda responses. But I get it, trollers gonna troll. cheers.

So: You have no evidence. No sources. Offering only rebuttals based on emotions and unsubstantiated assumptions stemming from parts unknown. You're a projectionist, and not a talented one at that. I mean, I'd throw you a bone and call you a troll, but even that is a skill, which you clearly don't possess. Best of luck to you mate.

You don't accept evidence from news sources. If you do, let me know which ones and I will see if I can find you some non-fake news.

Any sources you deem acceptable, lay them on me.

Clearly not how you feel. Just stated earlier that biggest news networks and even your teachers are not be trusted. Apologize, I couldn't help myself but the rabbit hole of ignorance is just too much. Sorry, once again. Have a nice life. Also, when the special counsel comes out with its findings, just remember, it was you that was wrong, not the "libruls and their tears"

Well, to sum it all up: You have not only zero evidence, no sources, emotion-based talking points, improperly developed asumptions, and projection 101..and now you are also reduced to pointless baiting. I'm disappointed, "debating" leftists has devolved considerably over the past couple years. I thought I'd get at least one measly "fact" out of you but that was too much to hope for. But I do accept your apoplogy. Mostly because I'm sympathetic to your plight. It's going to an awfully rough pill to swallow once you recognize how much theater you've been subjected to by the special counsel you've pinned so many hopes and dreams on. But we all must wake up someday.

Alright, I give. Here is one from super liberal rag. The worst of the worst. But they do know how to make up a great conspiracy Oh, wait, we are in a conspiracy sub but, oh, wait, why is no one talking about this? Oh, right, reasons.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-connection-between-a-russian-bank-and-the-trump-campaign

This just scratches the surface but puts a whole bunch of Trump's best people into the picture. Do me a favor and read it. Just punch yourself in the face to kill the brain-pain while doing it, but do do it. And, then do some research, see what others are saying. Notice, no alt-right, conservative or fascists will be talking about it but truth and justice do have a liberal bias.

Hence the word attempt buttercup...

Helped cover up the murder of Vincent Foster as well.

So many have been fooled don’t feel bad- they literally preyed on the fact that decent people were desperate for a change and an end to corruption and then used that hope and desperation against them. It takes a lot of courage self awareness and intelligence to realise when someone has fooled you and to admit it and change your thinking.

Kavanaugh's Bush connections were brought up early on. At the beginning of the cycle it was about how Trump/Senate is witholding hundreds of thousands of documents of his time at the Whitehouse. And nobody in the general public cares.

Just like the public doesn't care about the Patriot Act getting renewed with almost unanimous support.

And how Military Budgets increase every year.

But people do marginally care about salacious stories of sexual assaults.

But people do marginally care about salacious stories of sexual assaults.

So true. People were very violent about the allegations.

nope! Dems and Reps are both shit, but I was with Brett all the way!

Fuck weaponized sexual assault coming from the left. If they had one, we wouldve had even WORSE implications. Think using sexual assault to block other SCOTUS picks, Presidential elections, etc. It would literally be an attack on justice.

Beers for Brett!

Democrats did bring this up, it didn't matter. Why do you think Democrats pushing this issue would have made Republicans vote against him?

Talk about an overstatement OP. The only words its been definitively proven that he wrote are

“…the new law will update laws authorizing government surveillance.”

Which you failed to mention.

Naturally. The entire op reeks of l'eau de troll and hysteria..

It smells a little troll-y because you claim the impetus of your dissatisfaction with President Trump is the fact that you have learned (via an ACLU source no less) that Justice Kavanugh is a "fascist." Yet, in reading your public profile, it is notable you have previously made multiple statements indicating a pessimistic and/or less than enthusiastic view of President Trump. My theory is your op was intended to mislead other posters with the false premise that this one singular event caused a shift towards a negative view of Trump, when that is not the case. It is for reasons known only to you..

This is exactly what I've been telling people! I didn't know the truth until days before the vote. I have spoken to multiple people about this to spread the truth

It's almost as if it was all about making men and women dislike and distrust each other ... but what reason could they have to do that ... oh wait ...

&#x200B;

You have no idea what a fascist is. It's not Kavanaugh, it's not Trump, it's entirely the left - who, by the way, pushed hard for "guilty until proven innocent". Go watch more CNN you NPC bot.

Yeah, I get your point, but if you have an issue with this and no one else up there your ideals are twisted. In comparison this is nothing. Who told you to get pissy about this and ignore the crimes of the left held in those same positions? If you want "conspiracy" find out how much wealth they've attributed during their lifetime appointments. Trace the money.

But alas, you won't listen to me, you'll just link me something else to refute.

If the left excels at one thing, it's at projection.

This qas widely covered prior to the allegations and is entirely public record. Pay more attention next time.

Yeah I was with you until the fascism part

its all a wrestling show...with less smackdown...soon as you accept this the better off you will be.

Question, how do you legally ever catch the deepstate if you can't ween out their bad actors from civilians? I hated spying but faced the fact nothing would change if we didn't do this.

Not if nsa was created by military and given free reign. Cia needs to use puppets on us soil, legally. Not nsa. Unless there's a militia I don't know about, I see no option for separating Patriot from enemy in any day and age.

Do you think all trials could be public? Iran just had US labeled as a rogue state in some world court. What if people found out Obama was the renegade? Would that make the world economy divert from America and or at least the usd? Would citizens trust America if they suddenly found out the Clinton's and bushes we're our masters? Could Americans understand that let alone the world looking to an American way of life as the dream?

Gorsuch is a sick fascist too. But ya, Kavanaugh had a key role in the Bush WH during 9/11 and help push the “legal” framework for torture

Look at it this way:

Had no one ever come forward with allegations against him, Kavanuagh would have been confirmed briskly without much a peep. The media would likely show you "how hard Dems fought" with clips of Booker and Harris trying to play gotcha with Brett.

Truth is that both dems are reps have swamp creatures beholden to the corporate $$.

Rand Paul voted for the guy. What happened to that hack?

That much has been obvious from the very beginning. I’ve always thought this was just a distraction, they would focus on this and push him through anyways. Since everyone’s attention is on that, no one would notice how much of an authoritarian he was.

Regardless of the allegations I never wanted to see him get the position. He was part of the patriot act, and is also for mass surveillance among other terrible things.

The general public couldn't give two shits about the patriot act or their privacy. Remember prism? Remember the outrage that followed after it was announced? Me neither. Not only do they not care, they think Snowden their enemy. We're all fucked, and most of us bend over and spread

I posted about this on this very sub 6 days ago.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/9l7w3e/epic_epic_calls_on_senate_leaders_to_postpone

I just realized that a lot of Republican partisans really love government and the conspiracy is who is against their agenda.

Respect for admitting your errors in judgement.

Off the top of my head, I'd guess at least 40% of the senators in that room voted for the patriot act.

Fairly clear that neither party has issues with his track record. Which just confirms that our political parties are shams built to divide us and control our population. Divide and conquer is a basic but effective strategy. Look at the division on this sub, the amount of people arguing over politics instead of talking about real issues.

I was hoping for the Democrats to bring that up instead of using the accusations as thier main ammo. They couldve said "any republican who votes for him supports big government spying on you" but no the weak and spineless democrats failed.

How could you be fooled by Trump? He is one of the most obvious con-men that you could imagine!

God it’s just becoming so obvious now what they’re doing with the people they put in “power” of our country.

Bush was the idiot who ushered us into the beginning of the end with 9/11, cradled us into our security state.

Obama was the false redeemer, the one to bring “change” and make America “not racist” anymore, which inevitably leads to more security cuz “muh fascism” then Trump came along, to expose how fucked this country really is, and pretend to rally all the “woke” people up, pit everyone against each other, make Russia a scapegoat as we literally turn the Middle East to rubble that Obama and Bush didn’t already bomb to shit, while China secretly begins to take more and more control of everything(although yes I’m aware they still need the rest of the world for exports and debt and whatnot, that’s why we haven’t been taken over yet but they’re workin on it).

Idk what the next step is, I’m guessing Radical Democrat that pulls false flags every other week until we don’t have guns and become skittery scared gerbils that hate each other and only watch Netflix and talk to “friends” on Instagram which will eventually take over and be the only social we’re allowed to use besides google due to “hacking”. All conjecture, idk for sure what’s gonna happen but I don’t like how it’s been and am disgusted to see where it’s going.

This nonironically reads like astroturfing. Kavanaugh is a psychopath like most leaders. The democrips just decided they didn't like him. Both sides are the same.

Wag the Dog is a documentary IMO... We got wagged into thinking a Bush era, Big Brother Kennedy 2.0 judge was a based anti-establishment, MAGA hat wearing... you get the idea.

The info for you to make that conclusion was readily available--right in front of your face even. There was no bait and switch.

This is bullshit. I am not saying for sure that you are intentionally misleading us, but it is a possibility.

Basically every supreme court justice went to Harvard or Yale. I think there's about 2 who didn't and they still studied at one or the other for a bit. Everything is controlled.

This is what I've been saying.

Ford is obviously a democrat puppet. But Kavenaugh is kind of a piece of shit by himself. Unfortunately the sexual assault song and dance was the only chance they had to block. Republicans weren't going to vote no for a guy who towed the party line for twenty years.

You “just” realized? You are a fool. I hate how donkeybrained this country are. The people who have such a massive boner against identity politics that they supported Kavanaugh BECAUSE of the allegations are just as bad as those wrapped up in identity politics

Yeah exactly, a fool. Fools will always be victim of blind hero worship. Just as bad as those who supported someone “just because Obama picked them.” Start reading and thinking for yourself.

pretty sure the democrats did this on purpose. the dems abused the laws he created just as much if not more so than bush did. any focus on his actual record would have been bad for both sides so they drummed up this circus so we would all focus on that rather than ask those questions.

from the outset they had to have known this was going to go no where and not actually block an nominee, so why do it other than as a smoke screen. frankly it worked pretty god damn well, i dont think i saw a single question asked about his actual history in the media.

I think you have to blame GW Bush for coming up with an idea to get around needing a 2/3 majority to confirm a judge. I think you have to blame Harry Reid the the democratic party for screwing our republic and having the balls to put that plan into action.

Since all you need is a majority, there is no reason to pick someone who isn't radical. I think unless we can get the rules in the senante back to what they were where 2/3's of the senate must confirm, we will never see a moderate on the court again.

I also think once one of the two parties really does solidify their power life in this country will become very hard because people at the fringes of both groups are bat-shit crazy and out for the blood of anyone that doesn't jump onto their runaway truck.

When I vote, I no longer care about party and I'm giving my vote to whoever sits closest to the middle.

I'm the tiny 1% who realizes Gorsuch is good and Kavanaugh is bad.

Fight me.

KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judge, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc: I vote to deny plaintiffs’ emergency petition for rehearing en banc. I do so because, in my view, the Government’s metadata collection program is entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, plaintiffs cannot show a likelihood of success on the merits of their claim, and this Court was right to stay the District Court’s injunction against the Government’s program. The Government’s collection of telephony metadata from a third party such as a telecommunications service provider is not considered a search under the Fourth Amendment, at least under the Supreme Court’s decision in Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979).

Maybe an ignorant thought of me and i don't think he could he have stopped the patriot act, but could it be the patriot act were even worse if Kavenaugh had not been helping?

Just becouse someone apears to be on the same team does not mean they can't have a different agenda waiting to play out.

Maybe you did. Anyone who wasn't bait and switched by Trump already, knew this.

The funny thing is that the Democrats did bring this up, and kavanaugh lied and said he had "no knowledge" of this same thing with the torture memo.

You didn't get "bait and switched". Trump has told you what he thinks. Constantly. He told you who he was nominating and his history was for anyone who could see.

You joined many who ignored all he said, just grabbed on to some things he said that you liked and instead projected your hopes and beliefs on him "cause he was different".

But in reality trump has been up front about increasing scope of govt power in law enforcement, is surrounded by career politicians, lobbyists, and guys like john Bolton and has pretty much ran a basic republican playbook (except with tariffs). You would've gotten judge kav with any republican president.

You did not get bait and switched. You are getting what you were told you would get from the man himself. You chose to believe otherwise

There are a lot of reasons that Kavanaugh is a terrible person. We didn't hear about any of them.

Fact:

He litterally helped write the patriot act. What the fuck? If the democrates actually wanted him to fail, they wouldve simply stated this fact.

The Democrats and Republicans were both in on setting up the Patriot Act. If you thought the Democrats were going to do anything against the Patriot Act, you have terribly misunderstood the degree of what is transpiring.

Maybe i misinterpreted you post?

you can't betray what you were never were on the side of in the first place.

If the democrates actually wanted him to fail, they wouldve simply stated this fact.

All his past bullshit in the Bush administration was brought up, and a lot of it was purposely hidden by the republicans, a point democrats pounded like crazy. Several dems circumvented the republican's "committee confidential" designation on some documents and released them anyways. Documents that clearly showed he was being misleading and lying under oath in these hearings and in previous ones. Other documents the white house just straight up refused to provide at all. But there was enough to clearly show he was involved in discussions about spying on citizens and the torture program while he worked for Bush, that he lied about it, and that republicans were desperately trying to hide it.

His shitty past actions in government were talked about. A lot. The republicans hiding huge portions of his record were talked about. A lot.

Stop. Just stop with your fear porn. Jesus. You here acting like the Supreme Court has been your best friend all the years prior. The SC, unless your a rich elitist, ain’t your friend, never has been, never will be. Why don’t you stop with your concern-trolling BS. If your legit, bring up the SC decisions that have fucked up personal liberties and squished the We the People. Bring up the SC itself and get people talking about that. Ur concern-trolling needs to GTFO.

Yep! Nobody ever gets on the court who is anti establishment.

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum....”

Noam Chomsky.

It definitely happened here.

Overall, maybe the Dems are no better than the GOP. I agree that both parties are completely corrupt. On the single issue of confirming Brett Kavanaugh, they were better though. On broader issues of domestic surveillance, I don't think Dems can claim they're good overall, especially not elected Dems, but if you look at the people who have been fighting it hardest, most come from the far left-wing base, and they have been slowly working on reforming the Dem party. Whatever resistance to these issues there was among the right-wing base has pretty much been pacified or co-opted the same way the Tea Party was.

Lots of people oppose it yes, but not enough for politicians to care about because they keep renewing it.

They get away with it by entirely fucking on social issues. The things that government is least responsible for and the least effective in controlling.

Anytime "liberal" is actually defined by these guys, it's ALWAYS about social/communism/economic freedom. Then when they really about liberals it's ALWAYS about how people feel on some edge issue about some minority.

It's the same with "conservative." They will ALWAYS define it in economic terms, but then ALWAYS refer to it in some social issue aspect.

I would attempt to define it as A. Breaking out of the 2 party paradigm B. More personal responsibility less welfare/nanny state. C. Holding banks/corporations responsible for their shenanigans! D. NOT looking for elected officials to change the power structure for the benefit of “ the 99%”. To name a few.

Oh you are right for sure. Just think the last few years have been so hyperhyped (I’m making that word up because that’s the only way I can explain it). Non issues targeted as massive issues all with the purpose of pitting me against my neighbor. The MSM just drums it up even more.

I respect your admitting that. Well what is there to do now but try to fix things? It really makes no different if you were a lifelong Democrat or if you just decided yesterday that it's for you-- what really makes a difference is your vote in the next election.

To be fair, the Senate was all set to ram Kavanaugh through before the sexual assault allegations went public. I know it looks like that was a distraction, but the truth is there was nobody to distract. There was never any amount of talking that was going to get the 50 senators who voted for him, to vote against him.

Great write up, although I can't figure what you're trying to say in response to my comment. If you're saying the dems secretly wanted him on the court, which is how I'm understanding your comment at the moment, then making up/bringing forth these allegations seems very unnecessary and doesnt pass oceans razor to me at all. If that's not your point I'd love some clarification.

I did look at the link, sir. Again: How do you feel fooled by Trump? Did Trump make an untrue statement regarding Kavanaugh's record? You're not connecting the dots here. I'm going to be honest with you: I don't believe you were ever a true Trump supporter. I think you are either trolling, or a bit hysterical.

I don't even know what you're saying but it appears very anecdotal. Nice try tho

Then why did you vote for him "as a joke?" It's hardly shady, stand behind your words. Interestingly I actually share some of the same opinions as you, and you have made many thoughtful posts in the past. I just find it highly suspicious that you claim to only now feel "fooled" by a supposed "bait and switch" by President Trump though you have no evidence to support any untrue statement's on his part.. In tandem with your statements that you voted for him as "a joke."

Seems like the politics sub isn't that bad after all. Maybe they are trying to protect citizens instead of sycophantically following a phoney leader and his cronies. People there are allowed to talk about all sides but propaganda and trolling do get down voted because views that aren't based on propaganda from 4chan are not appreciated. And, I get it, "MSM is all lying! Just a bunch of SJWs trying to make your kids gay and the pizza is molesting my children" but maybe this crap is being yelled out by people who don't want you to listen to all sides of the story. Maybe the side that told you Chad Chadvanaugh is a strict constitutionalist didn't want you know that he irreparably damaged the 4th Amendment for all citizens. Maybe the side yelling about fake news actually wants to limit the 1st Amendment so you don't have the educated and informed story. You don't need to accept everything you read but maybe you should do a little more research on both sides of a story before accepting it. This is why the Left lost. They didn't see the alt-right propaganda machine coming before it was too late. If this government cared a dime about its citizens it wouldn't tell people that everything that doesn't conform to their narrative is fake news.

“Beliefs are dangerous. Beliefs allow the mind to stop functioning. A non-functioning mind is clinically dead. Believe in nothing.” ― Maynard James Keenan

Yeah, I get your point, but if you have an issue with this and no one else up there your ideals are twisted. In comparison this is nothing. Who told you to get pissy about this and ignore the crimes of the left held in those same positions? If you want "conspiracy" find out how much wealth they've attributed during their lifetime appointments. Trace the money.

But alas, you won't listen to me, you'll just link me something else to refute.

A big important one is the right for women to have equal political power (the right to vote). and workplace opportunities.

Property rights for women.

Recognizing that gender is not strictly according to the bible and not punishing and abusing people who are LGBT.

Don't worry, I get you are trying to justify why you support Trump but those hoops you are jumping threw must be getting smaller and smaller.

Interesting, how so?

He chose him because of his stance on the absolute power of the president and his ability to be above the law

doesn't belief in the 4th Amendment so will most likely bend on all the amendments

He is the best judge for Trump not the best person for the job

Really. More baseless assumptions, and I'm the one jumping "threw" ever-diminishing hoops? I'm not trying to be rude, but if you are going to engage in civil discourse, at least argue based on factual statements, rather than forcing your wildly illogical emotionally-charged conclusions based on radical leftist talking points.

"To move forward." "Gradual betterment." ...Those are two definitions from Webster's that fit the context.

Wait until you find out that Kavanaugh isn't a fascist and he didn't actually help write the PATRIOT ACT. You are either pretending to be a flipped Trump supporter or you are falling for a trick.

Why would they bring it up? They where complicit in the Patriot Act.

The high level of upvotes on these comments that are basically long ways to say “support the system. You have no choice” is v disturbing. TMoR

They didn't bring it up enough, but they did bring it up. He just didn't answer.

They're both corporate lackeys. They don't represent the will of the people, only the will of the few. But you keep voting for one or the other out of fear of the other. Just the fact that they won't let a 3rd party in the debates should be a wake up call of a failed democracy.

I'm not saying it's not a failed democracy, but the Koch's are only supporting one side.

You are saying it. Loudly I might add.

Look dude, I aint got time to fucking read this guys entire life

Takes less than two minutes to read a wall of text. Yet you can make posts on reddit.

But limiting the spectrum...

Lies

I tried talking to people about his actual voting record, but no one gave a fuck.