Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire A HUGE Reason The Left Doesn't Want Kav

We all know the left doesn't want a conservative on the Supreme Court. They want a judge that will "write" law, not uphold law. This exchange between Kav and Lindsey Graham is very telling. Think of everything that went on starting in 2008 until last year, and this should say a lot of the opposition to Kav.

The youtube is from the confirmation hearings. Fast forward to 2:36:00 to see this live. Below is the exchange.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et2jf-C6TkE&feature=youtu.be

Graham: "So, when somebody says, post-9/11, that we've been at war, and it's called "The War on Terrorism", do you generally agree with that concept?"
1 reply 18 retweets 63 likes

Kavanaugh: "I do, Senator, because Congress passed the authorization for use of military force, which is still in effect, and that was passed, of course, on September 14, 2001, 3 days later."

Graham: "Let's talk about the law and war. Is there a body of law called The Law of Armed Conflict?

Kavanaugh: "There is such a body, Senator."

Graham: "Are there differences between those two bodies of law?"

Kavanaugh: "Yes, Senator."

Graham: "From an American citizen's point of view, do your Constitutional rights follow you? If you're in Paris, does the Fourth Amendment protect you, as an American, from your own government? "

Kavanaugh: "From your own government, yes."

Graham: "Okay. So, if you're in Afghanistan, do your, uh, Constitutional rights protect you against your own government?"

Kavanaugh: "If you're an American in Afghanistan, you have Constitutional rights as against the U.S. government....That's the, that's long-settled law."

Graham: "Isn't there long-settled law that goes back to Eisenstraider case? I can't remember the name of it."

Kavanaugh: "Johnson versus Eisentrager."

Graham: " That American citizens who collaborate with the enemy have been considered enemy combatants."

Kavanaugh: "They can be."

Graham: "They can be?"

Kavanaugh: "They can be. They're sometimes criminally prosecuted, they're sometimes treated in the military system."

Graham: "Well, let's talk about 'can be'. I think the ..."

Kavanaugh: "Under the Supreme Court precedent, right."

Graham: "There's a Supreme Court decision that said that American citizens who collaborated with Nazi sabateurs were tried by the military. Is that correct?"

Kavanaugh: "That is correct."

Graham: "I think a couple of them were executed."

Kavanaugh: "Yeah."

Graham: "So, if anybody doubts, there's a long-standing history in this country that your Constitutional rights follow you wherever you go, but you don't have a Constitutional right to turn on your own government and collaborate with the enemy of the Nation...."..You'll be treated differently. What's the name of the case, if you can recall, that reaffirmed the concept that you could hold one-of-our-own as an enemy combatant if they were engaged in terrorist activities in Afghanistan? Are you remember that case?"

Kavanaugh: "Yeah. Hamdi."

Graham: "Okay. So the bottom line is every American citizen you have Constitutional rights but you do not have a Constitutional right to collaborate with the enemy..."...There is a body of law, well-developed, long before 9/11, that understood the difference between basic criminal law and The Law of Armed Conflict. Do you understand those differences?"

Kavanaugh: "I do. I do understand ...they're different bodies of law, of course, Senator."

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...serious-human-rights-abuse-or-corruption

Executive Order 13818 of December 20, 2017
Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (Public Law 114-328) (the “Act”), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)) (INA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the prevalence and severity of human rights abuse and corruption that have their source, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States, such as those committed or directed by persons listed in the Annex to this order, have reached such scope and gravity that they threaten the stability of international political and economic systems. Human rights abuse and corruption undermine the values that form an essential foundation of stable, secure, and functioning societies; have devastating impacts on individuals; weaken democratic institutions; degrade the rule of law; perpetuate violent conflicts; facilitate the activities of dangerous persons; and undermine economic markets. The United States seeks to impose tangible and significant consequences on those who commit serious human rights abuse or engage in corruption, as well as to protect the financial system of the United States from abuse by these same persons.

I therefore determine that serious human rights abuse and corruption around the world constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

I hereby determine and order:

Section 1. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:

(i) the persons listed in the Annex to this order;

(ii) any foreign person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General:

(A) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have directly or indirectly engaged in, serious human rights abuse;

(B) to be a current or former government official, or a person acting for or on behalf of such an official, who is responsible for or complicit in, or has directly or indirectly engaged in:

(1) corruption, including the misappropriation of state assets, the expropriation of private assets for personal gain, corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources, or bribery; or

(2) the transfer or the facilitation of the transfer of the proceeds of corruption;

(C) to be or have been a leader or official of:Start Printed Page 60840

(1) an entity, including any government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, any of the activities described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section relating to the leader's or official's tenure; or

(2) an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order as a result of activities related to the leader's or official's tenure; or

(D) to have attempted to engage in any of the activities described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section; and

(iii) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General:

(A) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of:

(1) any activity described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section that is conducted by a foreign person;

(2) any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(3) any entity, including any government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, any of the activities described in subsections (ii)(A), (ii)(B)(1), or (ii)(B)(2) of this section, where the activity is conducted by a foreign person;

(B) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(C) to have attempted to engage in any of the activities described in subsections (iii)(A) or (B) of this section.

(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted before the effective date of this order.

Sec. 2. The unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens determined to meet one or more of the criteria in section 1 of this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and the entry of such persons into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, is hereby suspended. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).

Sec. 3. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the types of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 4. The prohibitions in section 1 include:

(a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and

(b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 5. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 6. For the purposes of this order:Start Printed Page 60841

(a) the term “person” means an individual or entity;

(b) the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; and

(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

Sec. 7. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to this order.

Sec. 8. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including adopting rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to me by IEEPA and the Act as may be necessary to implement this order and section 1263(a) of the Act with respect to the determinations provided for therein. The Secretary of the Treasury may, consistent with applicable law, redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States. All agencies shall take all appropriate measures within their authority to implement this order.

Sec. 9. The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to take such actions, including adopting rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to me by IEEPA, the INA, and the Act as may be necessary to carry out section 2 of this order and, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the reporting requirement in section 1264(a) of the Act with respect to the reports provided for in section 1264(b)(2) of that Act. The Secretary of State may, consistent with applicable law, redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 10. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, is hereby authorized to determine that circumstances no longer warrant the blocking of the property and interests in property of a person listed in the Annex to this order, and to take necessary action to give effect to that determination.

Sec. 11. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).

Sec. 12. This order is effective at 12:01 a.m., Eastern Standard Time, December 21, 2017.

Start Printed Page 60842
Sec. 13. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...-manual-for-courts-martial-united-states

Executive Order 13825 of March 1, 2018
2018 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. 801-946), and in order to prescribe amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, prescribed by Executive Order 12473 of April 13, 1984, as amended, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Part II, Part III, and Part IV of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, are amended as described in Annex 1, which is attached to and made a part of this order.

Sec. 2. The amendments in Annex 1 shall take effect on the date of this order, subject to the following:

(a) Nothing in Annex 1 shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to the date of this order that was not punishable when done or omitted.

(b) Nothing in Annex 1 shall be construed to invalidate the prosecution of any offense committed before the date of this order. The maximum punishment for an offense committed before the date of this order shall not exceed the maximum punishment in effect at the time of the commission of such offense.

(c) Nothing in Annex 1 shall be construed to invalidate any nonjudicial punishment proceeding, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action begun prior to the date of this order, and any such nonjudicial punishment proceeding, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action shall proceed in the same manner and with the same effect as if the amendments in Annex 1 had not been prescribed.

Sec. 3. (a) Pursuant to section 5542 of the Military Justice Act of 2016 (MJA), division E of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Public Law 114-328, 130 Stat. 2000, 2967 (2016), except as otherwise provided by the MJA or this order, the MJA shall take effect on January 1, 2019.

(b) Nothing in the MJA shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to January 1, 2019, that was not punishable when done or omitted.

(c) Nothing in title LX of the MJA shall be construed to invalidate the prosecution of any offense committed before January 1, 2019. The maximum punishment for an offense committed before January 1, 2019, shall not exceed the maximum punishment in effect at the time of the commission of such offense.

(d) Nothing in the MJA shall be construed to invalidate any nonjudicial punishment proceeding, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action begun prior to January 1, 2019. Except as otherwise provided in this order, the MJA shall not apply in any case in which charges are referred to trial by court-martial before January 1, 2019. Except as otherwise provided in this order, proceedings in any such case shall be held in the same manner and with the same effect as if the MJA had not been enacted.Start Printed Page 9890

Sec. 4. The Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, as amended by section 1 of this order, is amended as described in Annex 2, which is attached to and made a part of this order.

Sec. 5. The amendments in Annex 2, including Appendix 12A, shall take effect on January 1, 2019, subject to the following:

(a) Nothing in Annex 2 shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to January 1, 2019, that was not punishable when done or omitted.

(b) Nothing in section 4 of Annex 2 shall be construed to invalidate the prosecution of any offense committed before January 1, 2019. The maximum punishment for an offense committed before January 1, 2019, shall not exceed the maximum punishment in effect at the time of the commission of such offense.

(c) Nothing in Annex 2 shall be construed to invalidate any nonjudicial punishment proceeding, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action begun prior to January 1, 2019. Except as otherwise provided in this order, the amendments in Annex 2 shall not apply in any case in which charges are referred to trial by court-martial before January 1, 2019. Except as otherwise provided in this order, proceedings in any such case shall be held in the same manner and with the same effect as if such amendments had not been prescribed.

Sec. 6. (a) The amendments to Articles 2, 56(d), 58a, and 63 of the UCMJ enacted by sections 5102, 5301, 5303, and 5327 of the MJA apply only to cases in which all specifications allege offenses committed on or after January 1, 2019.

(b) If the accused is found guilty of a specification alleging the commission of one or more offenses before January 1, 2019, Article 60 of the UCMJ, as in effect on the date of the earliest offense of which the accused was found guilty, shall apply to the convening authority, in addition to the suspending authority in Article 60a(c) as enacted by the MJA, to the extent that Article 60:

(1) requires action by the convening authority on the sentence;

(2) permits action by the convening authority on findings;

(3) authorizes the convening authority to modify the findings and sentence of a court-martial, dismiss any charge or specification by setting aside a finding of guilty thereto, or change a finding of guilty to a charge or specification to a finding of guilty to an offense that is a lesser included offense of the offense stated in the charge or specification;

(4) authorizes the convening authority to order a proceeding in revision or a rehearing; or

(5) authorizes the convening authority to approve, disapprove, commute, or suspend a sentence in whole or in part.

Sec. 7. The amendment to Article 15 of the UCMJ enacted by section 5141 of the MJA shall apply to any nonjudicial punishment imposed on or after January 1, 2019.

Sec. 8. The amendments to Articles 32 and 34 of the UCMJ enacted by sections 5203 and 5205 of the MJA apply with respect to preliminary hearings conducted and advice given on or after January 1, 2019.

Sec. 9. The amendments to Article 79 of the UCMJ enacted by section 5402 of the MJA and the amendments to Appendix 12A to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, made by this order apply only to offenses committed on or after January 1, 2019.

Sec. 10. Except as provided by Rule for Courts-Martial 902A, as promulgated by Annex 2, any change to sentencing procedures:

(a) made by Articles 16(c)(2), 19(b), 25(d)(2) and (3), 39(a)(4), 53, 53a, or 56(c) of the UCMJ, as enacted by sections 5161, 5163, 5182, 5222, 5236, 5237, and 5301 of the MJA; orStart Printed Page 9891

(b) included in Annex 2 in rules implementing those articles, applies only to cases in which all specifications allege offenses committed on or after January 1, 2019.

Sec. 11. The amendments to Article 146 of the UCMJ enacted by section 5521 of the MJA and the new Article 146a enacted by section 5522 of the MJA shall take effect on the day after the report for fiscal year 2017 required by Article 146(c) of the UCMJ (as in effect before the MJA's amendments) is submitted in accordance with Article 146(c)(1), but in no event later than December 1, 2018.

Sec. 12. In accordance with Article 33 of the UCMJ, as amended by section 5204 of the MJA, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, will issue nonbinding guidance regarding factors that commanders, convening authorities, staff judge advocates, and judge advocates should take into account when exercising their duties with respect to the disposition of charges and specifications in the interest of justice and discipline under Articles 30 and 34 of the UCMJ. That guidance will take into account, with appropriate consideration of military requirements, the principles contained in official guidance of the Attorney General to attorneys for the Federal Government with respect to the disposition of Federal criminal cases in accordance with the principle of fair and evenhanded administration of Federal criminal law.

_______________________________-____

this document essentially establishes the preservation of the government’s right to prosecute crimes of treason and deep state collusion against America, all of which may be prosecuted via military tribunals under existing U.S. law.

This would allow deep state traitors to be arrested by military police and subjected to military trials run by the Pentagon, completely bypassing the corrupt court system which has been deliberately stacked with complicit deep state traitors and “resistance” judges.
_____________________________________

One word describes why they don’t want Kavanaugh..... ABORTION!

That's just a bone for the brain dead left protesters to chew on. This is all about The Constitution and taking those that have been violating it for years Down, many call them, "The Deep State".

Their precious Roe v Wade has unsraveled their sensibilities.

Their untethered violence and hate speak will be their final demise.

This has NOTHING to do with Kavanaugh, it has everything to do with blocking/stopping trump, plain and simple. Whomever was put up would face this. They are simply hoping to delay until the mid-terms, if they lose, they will allow the vote to happen (if it goes that far), if they win, they will vote "no".

This is not about anything but delay until they get power, not about the main, his policies or anything else. They simply want to delay delay delay until they win in 2020, that's their hope.

I agree with Bob.

Can anyone name one of the, I don't know how many, 2 to 4 women that accused Herman Cain of sexual impropriety, thereby derailing the campaign, of a successful, conservative BLACK man to POTUS????

NOPE????

Thought not!

Mission accomplished, we're done here, everyone just go back home!

If they succeed with Kavanaugh, same thing will happen, these women will just fade away from the light!

If we are doing the one word thing.

Think SOROS

...another -- MSM owners. (well that's two )

The reason:
All of the above with the OP being reason #1..

It’s hard for me to comprehend a Conservative Judge that’s o k with stripping US Citizens on US soil of their constitutional rights to be secure from seizure of their property without due process. Giving that authority to three unelected bureaucrats don’t sound like due process to me.

Extreme crimes and out right treason calls for extreme measures. You give up those rights when you sabotage and commit high crimes against the very country that gave you those rights. No different than losing your right to own a gun or vote.

Also by delaying Kavanaugh, it will fire up the left's base for the midterms.

So....... warrantless search and seizure are justified because........?

No right to a jury trial is justified because.....?

The stage is being set.

Was the WW II internment of American citizens with Japanese ancestry ever ruled unconstitutional?

They want to reverse the idea that elections have consequences, i.e., the idea that major changes away from the elite agenda can be accomplished by means of putting people in office via elections.

The strategy seems clear. Stall until the elections. If they gain enough seats, block the nominee. If they don't gain enough seats, and the nominee is confirmed, claim the GOP is okay with appointing a rapist and go with the feminist battle cry for 2020.

Two things and a name. ABORTION, GUN CONTROL AND SOROS.
Paul B.