Posted on 07/09/2018 3:06:30 PM PDT by Signalman
UPDATE (5:20pm ET) - Several signs are pointing to Kavanaugh. Either it's him, or this is an extraordinary bit of misdirection. The breadcrumbs from my source are related to members of Team Kavanaugh abruptly leaving law firms this afternoon. The source says he's been told "from the inside" that Kavanaugh is the pick. The second tweet, however, could be even more telling:
UPDATE (3:30pm ET) - Three sources tell me the president's pick will not be Raymond Kethledge. One of them also says Amy Barrett is likely out, but that's less solid. Taken together, these indications suggest that the Times' reporting about Kavanaugh or Hardiman from this morning was accurate, but we won't know for certain until this evening. But the decision has been made. Here's what I know, followed by an intriguing piece of chatter that suggests that Barrett isn't out after all. And another that it could be Hardiman:
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Dang another guess that is completely different from the other two sure thing guesses.
I’m having a good time...
Roy Bean was spotted on a paint trotting towards the White House
Anyone but Hardiman.
His wife is a prominent Democratic donor and I don’t want to give her 30 years to work on him.
Wonder if he’s going to throw us a curveball. Someone we never even thought of.
Heard some bad things about this hombre! Not pro life and mirrors moderate justice Kennedy! If true this is truly...sad!!
Why would Trump venture that kind of gamble?
It doesn't sound like a gamble at all. I agree with what Kavanaugh wrote, and I've said so here on FR for years.
ObamaCare is an unconstitutional disaster on any number of grounds, but the case against the individual mandate is probably the weakest argument of them all.
I would put this decision -- along with Chief Justice Roberts' decision in the landmark case that "upheld ObamaCare" (what it really upheld was just the individual mandate) -- in the category of: "Supreme Court decisions where I don't like the result but I agree with the constitutional decision."
Sometimes that happens, even if we HATE the result. There was a similar one in the recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court -- where Clarence Thomas actually sided with the liberal dissenters in the Carpenter v. United States case. The Court decided that cell phone records owned and held by a third party were protected by the Fourth Amendment. Thomas dissented, and I agreed with his dissent.
These cases demonstrate an important difference between an "originalist" and a "textualist" on the U.S. Supreme Court. An originalist looks at the facts of a case and says: "What would the Founders who wrote the U.S. Constitution think about this?" A textualist looks at the facts of a case and says: "What does the U.S. Constitution say explicitly, and how would it apply to this?"
Antonin Scalia was an originalist. Clarence Thomas is a textualist. Both of them are among the most conservative Supreme Court justices this country has ever had ... and yet in some cases they aren't on the same side at all.
Laura ingraham (I trust her on court picks) wants Kavanaugh:
Laura Ingraham: Brett Kavanaugh
Fox News host Laura Ingraham joined the chorus of figures on the right banding behind a potential Kavanaugh nomination, tweeting Friday night that the judge’s “12 yrs of STELLAR opinions” should overshadow any criticism he may receive for originally being named to the bench under the George W. Bush administration.
“The fact that Kavanaugh—like so many conservatives his age—worked for Bush 43 is a nonsensical reason to oppose him for SCOTUS,” she tweeted
Thought Levin wanted Mike Lee.
I love it!!!
I’m having a good time...
Just imagine, the Dims are going crazy.
They are busier than a cat covering crap on linoleum.
Heehee!
It’s Manafort. Trump exacts the ultimate revenge on Mueller.
If you one that wants the Civil War II to begin tonight at 8pm central, just announce that Sarah Palin will be our next Supreme Court Justice.
LOL...…….”dreaming’ is not outlawed...……………………..”yet”!
assuming PDJT picks a good nominee (and I have every expectation he will)
we all have to get behind him or her
and
make SURE that the leftists and mavericks in the Senate don’t shaft the nomination
Judge Judy is your typical local judge. Hardly Supreme Court material.
><
That’s right.
“Wonder if he’s going to throw us a curveball. Someone we never even thought of.”
He might as well. Freepers have trashed every candidate, they’re all toast.
Amy Barrett. She has a nice long term in front of her and she is a good, solid conservative pick.
nominations just to drive the commie/nazi leftists MORE crazy (if possible!?)
1. Joe Ariapo
2. Roy Moore
3. Bill Donohue
4. Clint Eastwood
5. you name it...?
just for fun.... it would so So nice for PDJT to tweet that he’s added the above to his “short list” ha!
been spotted at home in Indiana
My $$ is on the chick.
1. Joe Ariapo
2. Roy Moore
3. Bill Donohue
4. Clint Eastwood
5. Ted Nugent
You forgot Ted Nugent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.