Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA)

+5
polecat
zsomething
2seaoat
ConservaLady
Floridatexan
9 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) GettyImages-1027443344

Why Kavanaugh? Turns out in 2011 Kavanaugh was one of three judges who ruled that foreigners may fund American political advocacy groups. And now a Russian company accused by Mueller of influencing an American election is using Kavanaugh’s opinion to get the case against them thrown out. Boiled down, Kavanaugh believes foreign actors may legally spend unlimited money in our political elections as long as they launder/funnel it through a political advocacy group. Like Russian officials giving the NRA & Paul Ryan’s Super PAC millions to get Trump elected.

Russian firm indicted in special counsel probe cites Kavanaugh decision to argue that charge should be dismissed

A Russian company accused by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III of being part of an online operation to disrupt the 2016 presidential campaign is leaning in part on a decision by Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh to argue that the charge against it should be thrown out.

The 2011 decision by Kavanaugh, writing for a three-judge panel, concerned the role that foreign nationals may play in U.S. elections. It upheld a federal law that said foreigners temporarily in the country may not donate money to candidates, contribute to political parties and groups, or spend money advocating for or against candidates. But it did not rule out letting foreigners spend money on independent advocacy campaigns.

Kavanaugh “went out of his way to limit the decision,” said Daniel A. Petalas, a Washington lawyer and former interim general counsel for the Federal Election Commission.

A motion filed by the Russian company this week repeatedly cites Kavanaugh’s decision, bringing new attention to his rulings on campaign finance laws and regulations during his tenure on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

snip

www.washingtonpost.com/...


Craig Unger
@craigunger
Why did Trump pick #Kavanaugh? Don't forget that 2011, K carefully crafted a ruling that allows foreigners (ie Russians) to fund political advocacy groups
https://wapo.st/2mtEfu5?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.58aed1b58265 …

4:08 PM - Sep 5, 2018

Russian firm indicted in special counsel probe cites Kavanaugh decision to argue that charge should...
The Supreme Court nominee’s opinion in the 2011 case and other decisions indicates he may be skeptical of restrictions on money in politics.

washingtonpost.com
2,341
2,260 people are talking about this

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/6/1793922/-Why-Kavanaugh-In-2011-He-Ruled-Foreigners-Russia-May-Fund-American-Political-Advocacy-Groups?detail=emaildkre

************

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


And:

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) Gettyimages-10277820942

'Kavanaugh Committed Perjury': New Documents Appear to Show Trump Supreme Court Pick Lied Under Oath Multiple Times

"Maybe there's a reason Senate Republicans tried to keep Kavanaugh's emails secret?"

byJake Johnson, staff writer


"How much perjury is too much perjury from a Supreme Court nominee?"

That was how one commentator responded to a flurry of new documents and emails released on Thursday by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) that appear to show President Donald Trump's Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath during hearings for his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 2004 and 2006.

"Simply put, Kavanaugh committed perjury."
—Matt McDermottIn 2004—after a Senate sergeant-at-arms report found that Republican staffer Manuel Miranda had stolen confidential communications and documents from Democratic senators—Kavanaugh told the Senate that he never received "documents that appeared...to have been drafted or prepared by Democratic staff members."

But new emails made public by Leahy on Thursday appear to show that Kavanaugh "got 8 pages of material taken verbatim from [the Vermont senator's] files, obviously written by Dem staff, labeled 'not [for] distribution." The stolen material detailed Democrats' efforts to oppose President George W. Bush's judicial nominees.

[...]

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/09/06/kavanaugh-committed-perjury-new-documents-appear-show-trump-supreme-court-pick-lied?cd-origin=rss&utm_term=%27Kavanaugh%20Committed%20Perjury%27%3A%20New%20Documents%20Appear%20to%20Show%20Trump%20Supreme%20Court%20Pick%20Lied%20Under%20Oath%20Multiple%20Times&utm_campaign=Stop%20Kavanaugh%20%5Cu2014%20A%20Corporation%20Masquerading%20as%20a%20Judge%20%7C%20News%20%2526%20Views&utm_content=email&utm_source=Daily%20Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&cm_mmc=Act-On%20Software-_-email-_-Stop%20Kavanaugh%20%5Cu2014%20A%20Corporation%20Masquerading%20as%20a%20Judge%20%7C%20News%20%2526%20Views-_-%27Kavanaugh%20Committed%20Perjury%27%3A%20New%20Documents%20Appear%20to%20Show%20Trump%20Supreme%20Court%20Pick%20Lied%20Under%20Oath%20Multiple%20Times

ConservaLady

ConservaLady

Loony lying lobotomized lefty liberals can try and twist and mischaracterize his record all they want, Kavanaugh will be confirmed.  He's an learned, wise, and experienced jurist with a "well qualified" rating from the American Bar Association.

Ginsburg will be replaced next someday and the horrific evil Roe V Wade baby-killing decision will be just a bad memory of a dark period in the history of our Great country.

God Bless America!  (and so it seems, He is!)

2seaoat



experienced jurist with a "well qualified" rating from the American Bar Association.

I agree, unless he had discussions about the pending investigation, and that would be perjury which would disqualify an otherwise qualified candidate. I like that he coaches girl's basketball. He is a smart and qualified jurist.

zsomething



The timing of Kavanaugh's nomination is pretty strange. Trump put out a big list of potential nominees... and he wasn't on it. Then Trump later put out another list of nominees... and, again, he wasn't on it. Then, suddenly, a guy who wasn't previously on any list rockets up to the number one spot?

After he was mentioned as saying sitting presidents can't be indicted?

Gotta wonder about the sudden intense interest in him, when Trump had none before.

polecat

polecat

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) Dmf0tt10



It appears Judge Kavanaugh may have committed some light perjury durin' his confirmation, but don't worry, he plans to pardon himself as soon as the Republicans confirm him. - Tea Pain


Ain't it funny that Trump has never asked the DOJ to go after Russian election interference but insists they arrest all his political enemies? - Tea Pain


I’m no HR professional but it’s prob a bad sign when an employee writes an anonymous letter calling you a brain-dead asshole and you can’t even narrow it down to 100 people. - Jess Dweck



In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) Dmpeq-10

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

2seaoat wrote: experienced jurist with a "well qualified" rating from the American Bar Association.

I agree, unless he had discussions about the pending investigation, and that would be perjury which would disqualify an otherwise qualified candidate.  I like that he coaches girl's basketball.  He is a smart and qualified jurist.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh—a GOP political hack

WASHINGTON—As federal appellate judge Brett Kavanaugh makes the rounds, lobbying senators for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, lawmakers are questioning his right-wing views on key issues—such as women’s right to reproductive choice and a worker’s right to unionize.

Don’t be surprised if Kavanaugh ducks, bobs, and weaves. So politicians might be better off asking him to explain his record, or lack thereof, before he joined the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. a dozen years ago.

Because the Senate debate on his nomination then shows Brett Kavanaugh was—in so many words—a Republican political hack, with little actual trial experience whatsoever: Five trials in 10 years, and only two on which he led the lawyers’ team. Of course, when asked about that, Kavanaugh did some ducking and bobbing before that discussion, too.

The result? “The nomination of Brett Kavanaugh is a political gift for his loyal service to this president”—Republican George W. Bush—“and his political party,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., concluded then.

“Mr. Kavanaugh is not being given an engraved plaque for his fine service. He is being given a lifetime appointment to the second highest court in the land. By every indication, Brett Kavanaugh will make this judgeship a gift that keeps on giving to his political patrons who have rewarded him richly.”

Kavanaugh’s partisanship and lack of legal experience were so obvious that the AFL-CIO, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the NAACP, the National Urban League, the United Auto Workers, and other organizations opposed him even then, which then-Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., noted. Those organizations usually weigh in only on Supreme Court seats, not on lower court judgeships.

Yet despite those warning flags, 53 Senate Republicans and four Democrats voted in 2006 to put Kavanaugh on that court, often called the second-most-powerful court in the country. Thirty-seven Democrats opposed him, while six Dems and a Republican were absent.

The only pro-Kavanaugh Democrat still in the Senate, Delaware’s Thomas Carper, didn’t speak during the debate then. But Carper made it clear after Trump’s nod that he’s dead set against putting Kavanaugh on the High Court now.

“In the years Judge Kavanaugh has served on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, he has revealed his true colors and his substantial record…has proven to be a profound disappointment,” Carper said. “Picking a nominee to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court is not a reality show. It should not be a choice outsourced to ideologues like those at the Heritage Foundation and The Federalist Society.”


On June 1, 2006, from left to right, President Bush, watches the swearing-in of Brett Kavanaugh as Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia by U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, far right. Holding the Bible is Kavanaugh’s wife Ashley Kavanaugh. Kennedy’s retirement from the Supreme Court created the opening which Trump plans to fill with Kavanaugh.| Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP
The other Democrats during that debate in May 2006 revealed Kavanaugh’s partisanship, always at the beck and call of his GOP bosses, especially presidential candidate, and later president, Bush.

The senators noted then the only lawyer with less trial experience than Kavanaugh before he joined the D.C. Circuit was a man Kavanaugh later worked for: Ken Starr, notoriously infamous as the creator of the impeachment charges against Democratic President Bill Clinton.

Kavanaugh worked on the Starr Report, too, senators said then. But that’s not all. At least one senator noted Kavanaugh was part of Bush’s legal team, after the controversial November 2000 election, that headed to Florida to stop the recount there. Courtesy of the Supreme Court, the halted recount eventually handed Florida—and thus the White House—to Bush.

“Mr. Kavanaugh is a nice young man who was nominated for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit after working for most of his career in behalf of the Bush-Cheney administration and the Republican Party in partisan, political jobs,” Sen. Mark Dayton, DFL-Minn., said then. Kavanaugh was 41 at the time.

“We have to be able to assure the American people the judges confirmed to lifetime appointments to the highest courts in this country are being appointed fairly to protect their interests, rather than to be a rubberstamp for whichever president nominated them,” Dayton, now Minnesota’s governor, said.

Besides the Starr report and service as Bush’s staff secretary, other senators detailed other partisan tasks Kavanaugh undertook:

– Kennedy pointed out Kavanaugh is totally unfamiliar with labor law—a point that’s become even more important under Trump. The Trump administration sided, strongly, with the right-wing corporate interests that pushed the Janus case. And federal worker unions are challenging Trump’s three anti-worker executive orders in U.S. District Court in D.C., in a hearing scheduled for July 25.

“The D.C. Circuit has a key role in upholding the rights of American workers. That court decides far more appeals than any other circuit of decisions by the National Labor Relations Board on unfair labor practices. Usually, these cases are filed by employers across the country attempting to overturn unfair labor practice findings against them,” Kennedy said then.

“During our” Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Kavanaugh then, “I asked Mr. Kavanaugh whether he had any experience handling labor law matters. He couldn’t provide a single example of work in this area, not one. Instead, he made vague reference to his work as a law clerk and his brief time in the Justice Department.”

“These aren’t arcane concerns,” Kennedy noted.

– As a member of Bush’s White House counsel’s office, Kavanaugh helped draft the record 750 “signing statements” Bush issued when he signed laws Congress passed but he partially disliked. In so many words, Bush said in each that he would not enforce the sections he hated.

– Again in Bush’s counsel’s office, Dayton noted, Kavanaugh helped craft and implement what Dayton called “the White House’s overbearing secrecy policy.”

“So now we are spending billions of dollars in marking things ‘top secret,’ some of which were on government websites for long periods of time until they”—Bush officials—“realized they were pointing out embarrassing mistakes in the Bush-Cheney administration. So they yanked” that data “off and marked it ‘top secret.’”

– Kavanaugh showed undue deference to the president. Kennedy noted the D.C. Circuit Court rules on Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act cases. Those decisions now often wind up at the Supreme Court.

The D.C. Circuit, the senator said, “is the only federal court that can grant a remedy when the executive branch fails…to protect the environment under these laws. Nothing in Mr. Kavanaugh’s record suggests he would be willing to keep the executive branch in compliance with the law on these matters.”

“More generally, nothing in his record suggests he would be able to avoid the partisanship and politics that have marked his (then) brief career.” Other senators noted Kavanaugh never opposed any of Bush’s judicial nominees, virtually all of whom were conservatives, if not hyper-right-wing.

– Kavanaugh’s partisanship extended to Bush’s Iraq war tactics. “As an Associate White House Counsel, Mr. Kavanaugh worked to support the nomination and confirmation of Jay Bybee, the author of the notorious—but then still secret—torture memo” for Bush, Kennedy added.

– Kavanaugh’s peers in the American Bar Association were lukewarm about his nomination. Most called him “qualified” for the circuit court, rather than well-qualified, 12 years ago. But some comments were scathing. The lawyers’ group has yet to comment on the Kavanaugh nomination to the Supreme Court.

“One interviewee called Mr. Kavanaugh ‘insulated,’” Durbin reported. “Another person said Mr. Kavanaugh is ‘immovable and very stubborn and frustrating to deal with on some issues.’”

“Is that what we are looking for in a judge, an insulated person, immovable and stubborn, who dissembles when he is in the courtroom and has a sanctimonious way about him? I can tell you, as a practicing lawyer, that is a judge I would avoid, and most people would avoid nominating that kind of lawyer to become a judge,” Durbin concluded.

https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-a-gop-political-hack/

PkrBum

PkrBum

ABOUT US

People’s World is a voice for progressive change and socialism in the United States.

2seaoat



The Bar Association would not have given a recommendation if he was a hack. He is a good man who has impeccable credentials and you may be surprised by some of these appointments and their rulings. Kagen picked him to teach at Harvard. The man is brilliant.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

2seaoat wrote:The Bar Association would not have given a recommendation if he was a hack.  He is a good man who has impeccable credentials and you may be surprised by some of these appointments and their rulings.  Kagen picked him to teach at Harvard.  The man is brilliant.

– Kavanaugh’s peers in the American Bar Association were lukewarm about his nomination. Most called him “qualified” for the circuit court, rather than well-qualified, 12 years ago. But some comments were scathing. The lawyers’ group has yet to comment on the Kavanaugh nomination to the Supreme Court.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


Here's a link to Thom Hartmann's series of videos on Kavanaugh:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5gNz_FycX96Q4EsIFrgfIvwyCWaHg93A

Here's one from the series:

2seaoat



Anybody who thinks this jurist is a political hack is simply following the lemmings over the cliff.

EmeraldGhost

EmeraldGhost

Floridatexan wrote: ....

Kavanaugh “went out of his way to limit the decision,” said Daniel A. Petalas, a Washington lawyer and former interim general counsel for the Federal Election Commission.
....

I'll admit I haven't read up too much on this .... and certainly am not a fan of foreign money in the US political system, but ......

Did Kavanaugh "go out of his way to limit the decision" as Mr Petalas says ? ... or did he rather not go out of his way a to expand upon the "letter of the law" as written/passed by Congress? Could be just a matter of judicial philosophy?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

2seaoat wrote:Anybody who thinks this jurist is a political hack is simply following the lemmings over the cliff.

http://www.nationalpartnership.org/research-library/general/seven-reasons-confirming-brett-kavanaugh-would-be-terrible-for-women.pdf

EmeraldGhost

EmeraldGhost

Laughing  Laughing

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) 41229810_1160945784087688_3551826666894393344_n

2seaoat



There is no excuse for the conduct of the committee not getting those documents to senators weeks before the hearing. I think this candidate should be confirmed but the Republicans conduct raises real suspicions of what they are trying to hide. It is silly. This guy is going to make a good judge.

Telstar

Telstar

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) Coatha10

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


Ghost, your meme is BULLSHIT.

PkrBum

PkrBum

Floridatexan wrote:
Ghost, your meme is BULLSHIT.

Because the meme didn't state the fact that Hillary's emails were under subpoena when destroyed?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

PkrBum wrote:
Floridatexan wrote:
Ghost, your meme is BULLSHIT.

Because the meme didn't state the fact that Hillary's emails were under subpoena when destroyed?

The Real Email Scandal Has Nothing To Do With Hillary

For a long time, the country has been obsessed with Hillary Clinton’s emails. There has been an almost total press blackout, however, on another, far more serious White House email scandal.

On September 12 Newsweek published an article, “The George W. Bush White House ‘Lost’ 22 Million Emails”. The article, by Nina Burleigh, noted,

Clinton’s email habits look positively transparent when compared with the subpoena-dodging, email-hiding, private-server-using George W. Bush administration. Between 2003 and 2009, the Bush White House ‘lost’ 22 million emails. This correspondence included millions of emails written during the darkest period in America’s recent history, when the Bush administration was ginning up support for what turned out to be a disastrous war in Iraq with false claims that the country possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and, later, when it was firing U.S. attorneys for political reasons.

It gets worse:

Like Clinton, the Bush White House used a private email server—its was owned by the Republican National Committee. And the Bush administration failed to store its emails, as required by law, and then refused to comply with a congressional subpoena seeking some of those emails. ‘It’s about as amazing a double standard as you can get,’ says Eric Boehlert, who works with the pro-Clinton group Media Matters. ‘If you look at the Bush emails, he was a sitting president, and 95 percent of his chief advisers’ emails were on a private email system set up by the RNC. Imagine if for the last year and a half we had been talking about Hillary Clinton’s emails set up on a private DNC server?’

Press coverage? A week later, on September 19, when I googled “George W. Bush email scandal” I got the Newsweek story and pieces by NPR, Huffington Post and Mother Jones. None of the major papers or networks critiqued, analyzed, or even discussed this story, with one exception. Fox News, ever ahead of the news cycle, had a piece last year explaining “what was really going on in 2007 and how it is different from the current situation Clinton is in.” The latest CNN piece, “White House: Millions of e-mails may be missing,” was dated April 13, 2007.

About the same time the Newsweek story broke and was ignored, Donald Trump, Jr. accused the press of covering up for Hillary Clinton. “The media has been her number one surrogate in this. Without the media, this wouldn’t even be a contest. But the media has built her up. They’ve let her slide on every discrepancy, on every lie....” In this case, the press indeed has been failing in its duty, but it’s not Hillary Clinton getting a free ride, it’s Republicans.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-slayton/the-real-email-scandal_b_12104086.html

******

And now we have a *resident who destroys documents and even eats them.

EmeraldGhost

EmeraldGhost

From what I've been reading .... ultimately, nobody's opinion about Kavanaugh really matters except that of two Republicans: Collins, Murkowski; and three Democrats: Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, and Joe Donelly (and possibly Mike Pence, but we all know which way he'd go on it)

Were I a betting man, despite all the hyperventilating from the left, I'd bet Kavanaugh is going to get the nod. The numbers are in his favor in the Senate .... and he's Catholic.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

EmeraldGhost wrote:From what I've been reading .... ultimately, nobody's opinion about Kavanaugh really matters except that of two Republicans: Collins, Murkowski; and three Democrats: Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, and Joe Donelly (and possibly Mike Pence, but we all know which way he'd go on it)

Were I a betting man, despite all the hyperventilating from the left,  I'd bet Kavanaugh is going to get the nod.  The numbers are in his favor in the Senate .... and he's Catholic.

Are you kidding me? Hyperventilating? Hysterical? Sen. Leahy has already caught him in a lie about the theft of documents in 2006. Sen. Harris alluded to his ties with a partner at Trump's law firm. He wasn't on the short list from the Federalist Society, not on the second one either. Plus, he has some debt that he tried to explain away as buying season tickets for his friends in advance, but what is more likely gambling debt. Yep...perfect candidate for the Supremes. Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

RealLindaL



zsomething wrote:The timing of Kavanaugh's nomination is pretty strange.  Trump put out a big list of potential nominees... and he wasn't on it.  Then Trump later put out another list of nominees... and, again, he wasn't on it.   Then, suddenly, a guy who wasn't previously on any list rockets up to the number one spot?

After he was mentioned as saying sitting presidents can't be indicted?

Gotta wonder about the sudden intense interest in him, when Trump had none before.  

This is the most salient and disturbing fact about this virtual dark horse candidate, and EVERYONE, including the usually intelligent Seaoat, should be asking themselves why he appeared out of nowhere, never having been on the list that Trump had publicly committed to pick from.

And I ain't no lemming.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

RealLindaL wrote:
zsomething wrote:The timing of Kavanaugh's nomination is pretty strange.  Trump put out a big list of potential nominees... and he wasn't on it.  Then Trump later put out another list of nominees... and, again, he wasn't on it.   Then, suddenly, a guy who wasn't previously on any list rockets up to the number one spot?

After he was mentioned as saying sitting presidents can't be indicted?

Gotta wonder about the sudden intense interest in him, when Trump had none before.  

This is the most salient and disturbing fact about this virtual dark horse candidate, and EVERYONE, including the usually intelligent Seaoat, should be asking themselves why he appeared out of nowhere, never having been on the list that Trump had publicly committed to pick from.

And I ain't no lemming.
cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers

It's obvious that Drumpf wants a get out of jail free card. In a complete reversal from his statements during the Clinton hearings, he now "believes" that the president can do anything with impugnity.

EmeraldGhost

EmeraldGhost

In 2011 Kavanaugh Ruled Foreign Actors May Fund American Political Advocacy Groups (Russia/NRA) 1hmof6

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum