Alan Dershowitz: Trump should nominate a 'true conservative' to the Supreme Court

Washington Examiner ^ | July 03, 2018 | Katelyn Caralle

[JME_FAN]

Unforgivable - or unforgiving?

[wardaddy]

True but he’s reasonably honest

He’s made enemies and his Epstein Lolita island rumors may come to haunt him

Dershowitz is sorta neocon really

It’s all about Israel which is better than full blown leftist

And he’s pretty good on the constitution

It’s be fun to see he and Levin and Miller argue though Miller is no lawyer

Miller has the sharpest brain I think I’ve ever seen that could articulate...he woulda been a great litigator

The battle of the beyond Mensa Jews....the sorta lapsed leftist versus the Constitutiionalist versus the Alt Right avenger

I’d pay to see that

Stephen Miler is kind of my hero...and he honed his skills with folks I tend to agree with....took balls to take his path

[faucetman]

With all the negative attacks swirling around SC nominees, one name seems to be being overlooked.

Hmmmmmm.

All the talk in the media is about Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, Mike Lee, and Raymond Kethledge.

Sources say..., experts say..., etc. (leaks?)

Is this an accident or by design?

Quietly, Tom Hardiman’s nomination proceeds.

[dead]

LoL! Dershowitz supports the removal of the second amendment from the Constitution, but you give him credit as a civil rights defender because he acknowledges that its there.

It IS there, independent of his generous acknowledgment of that fact. It is also a recognition of a god-given inherent right of all free people. As an inherent right, it exists for all.

Dershowitz advocates removal of the 2nd Amendment from our Constitution.

Care to try again?

[semantic]

Do you think globalists are philosophically committed to their current position, or is it simply a means to an end? The end being wealth, power and control.

If they are entirely agnostic, and they collectively see the tide turning back towards nationalism, then why wouldn't they re-position and redeploy their financial and political assets in order to get in front of the new trend?

In my experience, there are basically two kinds of people: believers and realists. It's easy to see this divide on the left; the crazy loons and the smart money manipulators. The right has the same relationship - look how long the GOPe jerked everyone around every 2 years literally for decades.

Our constitutional system recognized these people not only exist, but are pathologically attracted to government. So, the founders - being the realists they were - set out a system of checks & balances in an attempt to counter balance greed and avarice.

Believers tend to miss the big picture and embrace the simplicity of devotion. I understand it would be difficult to understand these types of machinations if one thought otherwise.

But, as the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding. Billionaire proglibs want to continue the money train. If the SC no longer provides the path, galvanizing 100s of millions of people to achieve legislative action is the next logical step.

[YogicCowboy]

I am not a lawyer, but I am beyond Mensa (literally, since I have belonged to two societies more exclusive, along with Mensa).

I consider all of these eggheads overrated - especially Levin, the so-called Constitutionalist who ignores the historical and manifest meaning of Natural-Born Citizen.

Full disclosure: I aspired to be a lawyer until age 17, when the implications of Roe v. Wade convinced me that jurisprudence had already become a mockery, and I did not want my soul tainted by supporting such a corruption of the Constitution and the Branches.