Message from @Forsaken.Rhoeth
Discord ID: 495417671974912001
@Converge did you find the link?
Pedo next
I hate them
🔥
Piss on Blumenthal, Liar, rat faced TURD💩
@V77 Hello how are you it's Unbelievable what these people the Demon-Rats did to Judge Brett Kavanaugh his Wife his 2 little girls his Family I cried when he was in Tears
In 2014, Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment when the en banc D.C. Circuit found that the Free Speech Clause did not forbid the government from requiring meatpackers to include a country of origin label on their products.[111][112] In United States Telecom Ass'n v. FCC (2016), Kavanaugh dissented when the en banc circuit refused to rehear a rejected challenge to the net neutrality rule, writing, "Congress did not clearly authorize the FCC to issue the net neutrality rule".[38][113][114]
Fourth Amendment and civil liberties
In November 2010, Kavanaugh dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc after the circuit found that attaching a Global Positioning System tracking device to a vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.[115][116] The circuit's judgment was then affirmed by the Supreme Court in United States v. Jones (2012).[117] In February 2016, Kavanaugh dissented when the en banc circuit refused to rehear police officers' rejected claims of qualified immunity for arresting partygoers in a vacant house.[38][118] In District of Columbia v. Wesby (2018), the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the circuit's judgment.[119]
His beautiful family.
It’s evil.
Brb
Afk
Communists
Facts of the case
Antoine Jones was arrested on Oct. 24, 2005, for drug possession after police attached a tracker to Jones's Jeep -- without judicial approval -- and used it to follow him for a month. A jury found Jones not guilty on all charges save for conspiracy, on which point jurors hung. District prosecutors, upset at the loss, re-filed a single count of conspiracy against Jones and his business partner, Lawrence Maynard. Jones owned the "Levels" nightclub in the District of Columbia. Jones and Maynard were then convicted, but a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Supreme Court specifically stated in a 1983 case regarding the use of a beeper to track a suspect that the decision could not be used to justify 24-hour surveillance without a warrant.
Watch and listen carefully https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1nUf8YY1oY
In Klayman v. Obama (2015), Kavanaugh concurred when the circuit court denied an en banc rehearing of its decision to vacate a district court order blocking the National Security Agency's warrantless bulk collection of telephony metadata.[120][121] In his concurrence, Kavanaugh wrote that the metadata collection was not a search, and, even if it were, no reasonable suspicion would be required because of the government's special need to prevent terrorist attacks.[122] In Klayman I, the plaintiffs, subscribers of Verizon Wireless, brought suit against the NSA, the Department of Justice, Verizon Communications, President Barack Obama, Eric Holder, the United States Attorney General, and General Keith B. Alexander, the Director of the National Security Agency.[3] The plaintiffs alleged that the government is conducting a "secret and illegal government scheme to intercept vast quantities of domestic telephonic communications" and that the program violates First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment and exceeds statutory authority granted by Section 215.[3] In Klayman II, the plaintiffs sued the same government defendants and in addition, Facebook, Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft, YouTube, AOL, PalTalk, Skype, Sprint, AT&T, Apple again alleging the bulk metadata collection violates the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment and constitutes divulgence of communication records in violation of Section 2702 of Stored Communications Act.[4]
Check out @TomFitton’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1045850421867270144?s=09
fbi already looked at in sept 13th or around that. nothing here
same return story
😱
@woodsracer544 lol the meme
Lol
Law clerk hiring practices and controversy
More than half of Kavanaugh's law clerks have been women (25 of 48) and more than a quarter have been people of color (13 of 48).[70] A number of Kavanaugh's law clerks are the children of other judges and high profile legal figures, including Clayton Kozinski (son of former federal Judge Alex Kozinski), Porter Wilkinson (daughter of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III), Philip Alito (son of Justice Samuel Alito), Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld (daughter of Yale Law Professor Amy Chua), and Emily Chertoff (daughter of former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff).[139][140]
On September 20, 2018, The Guardian reported that two prominent Yale professors had advised female law students at Yale that their physical attractiveness and femininity could play a role in securing a clerkship with Kavanaugh. Amy Chua reportedly stated that female law students should exude a "model-like" femininity and "dress outgoing" in their job interview with Kavanaugh. Jed Rubenfeld reportedly stated that Kavanaugh "hires women with a certain look".[141] In a statement to The Guardian in response to the report, Chua released a statement in which she denied the notion that Kavanaugh's hiring was impacted by the attractiveness of female clerks. She stated, "Judge Kavanaugh's first and only litmus test in hiring has been excellence."[141] Yale Law School Dean Heather Gerken has stated that the allegations reported by the Guardian "are of enormous concern to me and the school", and Yale is currently investigating the allegations.[142]
G'day all Happy Friday 😁 🤗