Connect with us

News

WATCH: Liberal Democrat Appellant Lawyer Explains Her Emphatic Support for Kavanaugh

Published

on

Here’s one of the craziest things about the Trump-era hysterical left.

They’re so adamantly opposed to Trump on every level, they wouldn’t recognize “moderate” if it smacked them in the face.

This week they’ve been too busy donning Handmaid’s Tale outfits and being dragged, kicking and screaming out of the proceedings to notice that…Kavanaugh isn’t super conservative.

Trending: ‘Pennsylvania Trial Court Rules’ Election ‘Was Likely Unconstitutional In PA’ & Gives ‘Legislators Power to Choose Electors’

In fact, he was recently grilled by Senator Lindsey Graham on the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade, and Kavanaugh’s responses left much to be desired for the pro-life movement.

take our poll - story continues below

Has There Been Voter Fraud in the 2020 Election?

  • Has There Been Voter Fraud in the 2020 Election?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

He is, however, a very solid judge with an admirable background that any sensible person, right or left, would have to agree qualifies him to serve on the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, Congress and Democrat voters often show a very significant lack of sense…something that has been on full display over the last week.

There is one lawyer on the left, however, who has, to her great credit, come out in support of Kavanaugh, and her words remind us all that Supreme Court justices are not appointed to favor one ideology or the other, but rather to interpret the founding documents upon which our nation was founded.

In a very striking video, she explains her endorsement for Kavanaugh, and, despite being a Hillary voter and proud Democrat, her reasoning is, indeed, quite sensible.

Successful and influential attorney Lisa Blatt, who says she has argued more cases before the Supreme Court than any other woman in history, explained to the Senate last week why she’s putting her emphatic support behind Kavanaugh:

My name is Lisa Blatt, and I know Judge Kavanagh in my capacity as an appellate lawyer here in Washington. I have argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court of the United States – more than any other woman in history. I am also a liberal Democrat and an unapologetic defender of a woman’s right to choose. My hero is Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for whom I had the great fortune of serving as a law clerk. I proudly voted for Hillary Clinton. I voted for President Obama twice. And with my apologies, Mr. Chairman, for this one, I wish Senator Feinstein were chairing this committee. And yet I am here today to introduce Judge Kavanaugh, and urge the Senate to confirm him as the next associate justice of the Supreme Court.

I’ve received many angry calls from friends and even strangers for supporting Judge Kavanaugh, but I was raised to call it like I see it, and I don’t see the choice before you as difficult. By any objective measure, Judge Kavanaugh is clearly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. After law school, he clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy, the justice he would succeed. He spent twelve years on the nation’s most prestigious Court of Appeals, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

His opinions are invariably thoughtful and fair, and many are known as instant classics – not just because they are important, but because they are written so clearly and well. The Supreme Court has adopted the reasoning in his opinions more than a dozen times.

Judge Kavanaugh’s judicial temperament and integrity are also flawless. He is meticulously prepared, and he treats litigants with respect, asking probing questions of both sides. He approaches judging by determining what the law requires, no matter his personal preference.

Judge Kavanaugh has taught at the nation’s top law schools, published thoughtful law review articles, and co-authored a leading treatise on judicial precedent, and as just mentioned, the ABA strongly endorsed him because “he meets the very highest standards of integrity, professional competence, and judicial temperament.”

On a personal level, I just can’t say enough nice things about the judge. I first met him almost ten years ago when he emailed me completely out of the blue to say that he liked an article I had written about arguing before the Supreme Court. Since then, we’ve become friends, and he has become a mentor to me in my career.

Judge Kavanaugh has spent countless hours listening to me talk about the challenges I have faced as a working mother in a profession dominated by men. He has been a great source of advice on these and many other issues about work-life balance. He understands that life is not always perfect, and he responds to life’s challenges with a self-deprecating sense of humor.

More generally, Judge Kavanaugh has been remarkably committed to promoting women in the legal profession. More than half of his law clerks have been women – something that is sadly by no means common. And almost all of his clerks, women and men, have gone on to clerk at the Supreme Court, including for Justices Kagan and Sotomayor.

As his former women law clerks told this committee, the legal provision is “[fairer] and more equal” because of Judge Kavanaugh. He’s mentored countless other women through the classes he teaches at Yale and Harvard Law Schools. Obviously, I know that Judge Kavanaugh has a conservative judicial outlook, and if he is confirmed he will have one of nine votes to definitively decide the meaning of the Constitution, including just how far to read it to protect the reproductive rights of women.

Now, if it were up to me, Justice Ginsburg would have all nine votes – but that’s not our system, and the reality is that the presidency and the Senate are in Republican hands. Judge Kavanaugh is the best choice that liberals could reasonably hope for in these circumstances.

I am sure that some members of the Senate knew that they would disagree with Justice Ginsburg’s legal views when she was a nominee, but Justice Ginsburg was confirmed 96 to 3. This body has obviously treated some nominees differently since then to the detriment of our courts.

I strongly disagree with the Senate’s treatment of Judge Garland. Judge Kavanaugh himself spoke glowingly of Judge Garland during his pending nomination, stating that, “Chief Judge Garland is a brilliant jurist. He’s thoughtful, he’s considerate, he’s collegial, he works well with others. He’s a good man – great integrity. And he’s supremely qualified by the objective characteristics of experience, temperament, writing ability, scholarly ability for the Supreme Court.” All of this is equally true of Judge Kavanaugh.

I do not think it is fair to hold Judge Kavanaugh responsible for the fact that Judge Garland is not a justice today. Instead, I would urge this committee to treat him as we expect him to treat litigants that appear before him – on his own merits and with an open mind toward someone whose views may differ from our own. Our judicial system is not well served by tit-for-tat politics. At the end of the day, I enthusiastically support Judge Kavanaugh, and I am proud to introduce him because he is unquestionably qualified by his extraordinary intellect, experience, and temperament, and he does easily fit within the mainstream of legal thought.

I look forward to the committee over the next few days getting to know the Judge Kavanaugh that I know, and at the end of that process, I hope you will agree that he should be confirmed to succeed his former boss on the Supreme Court.

 

 

Save conservative media!

News

CNN Medical Analyst Wants To Cancel Christmas: ‘We Just Can’t Do It This Year’

Published

on

Well, it seems the radical left in this country, especially the folks who work for mainstream media outlets, are just chomping at the bit to ruin the holidays for everyone, which isn’t all that surprising given how much they seem to hate the reason for the season in the first place. CNN medical analyst, Dr. Jonathan Reiner, appeared on the network where he said that “we just can’t do” Christmas “this year” because of the coronavirus. “So the next big holiday is obviously the Christmas, New Year’s holiday where people tend to travel, want to travel, want to be with family, but we just can’t do it this year. We’re going to cause needless deaths and particularly that’s among people we really care about, you know, our most vulnerable, our grandparents, our parents, our neighbors,” the doctor said. “We can’t travel this year. We need to stay home. This is a sacrifice that Americans can make and we should be making it for each other. Stay home, mask up, we’ll have a great series of holidays next year. We’ll really have something to celebrate next year,” Reiner stated. via Daily Wire: Reiner also said anyone who traveled for Thanksgiving “should be quarantining.” “They should be quarantining for probably seven to 10 days and then getting tested. That’s what they should do. If they just go back to what they were doing — going back to work, they are going to spread the virus. So much of this virus is spread by asymptomatic folks. So stay home for more than a week, get tested, then go back to work,” he said. “This virus is, you know, no longer isolated to certain enclaves in the United States. It’s all over the country. And when people travel from place to place, they just…

Continue Reading

News

Moderna Files For Emergency Approval For New Coronavirus Vaccine

Published

on

Moderna released a statement on Monday saying they are going to ask the Food and Drug Administration to give emergency approval to its new experimental COVID-19 vaccine. This makes Moderna the second company to file this request, following hot on the heels of Pfizer who filed their application earlier in the month. Moderna stated that new data shows their vaccine as being 94.1 percent effective in preventing COVID-19 infection. Pfizer’s effective rate was 95 percent. via Daily Wire: “We believe that our vaccine will provide a new and powerful tool that may change the course of this pandemic and help prevent severe disease, hospitalizations and death,” Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said in a statement. Bancel said last week that 20 million doses will be available by the end of the year. The FDA’s vaccine advisory committee is set to meet Dec. 17 to review data from the two companies. Pfizer said on Nov. 9 that its developmental vaccine for COVID-19 may be 90% effective at inoculating people against the disease. The rate of effectiveness was calculated by analyzing early data from 94 trial participants in a study involving 43,538 subjects from all over the world. The small early sample means that the protection rate could change by the time the study ends and all the participants are accounted for, according to the AP. One of the major differences between the two vaccines is that the one being produced by Moderna does not need to be put in sub-zero storage, while Pfizer’s does. This makes the Moderna vaccine much easier to distribute. A third vaccine is also in the works from AstraZeneca and Oxford University. This particular vaccine is said to be 90 percent effective. Guess now we’re just playing the waiting game to see which of these companies gets approved first. They…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week