Feinstein: Can a sitting president be required to respond to a subpoena?

[LuckyCharms]

Kavanaugh: That's a hypothetical question so I am not able to answer that question.

Blow it out your ass, Kavanaugh.

Answer the fucking question.

[cbdo2007]

1. They need to focus on recusal on potential Trump cases...

and frame it not as "If" Trump has a case before the SC but "When"

[SHRED]

2. Yes they do

Agreed

[lagomorph777]

3. Not a hypothetical; already answered in the affirmative (just ask Tricky Dick how that went)

[stopwastingmymoney]

4. I believe he had an opinion when that President was named Clinton

Documented? I'm off to confirm

[stopwastingmymoney]

7. CNN August 11

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/11/politics/brett-kavanaugh-subpoena-indictment-memos/index.html

I can't copy paste from here

'Argued that a sitting president would likely have to testify before a grand jury if subpoenaed'

Documented in memos re the Starr investigation

More details at link

[vlyons]

5. what perked up my ears was his long ramble about Nixon vs the US

where he glorified the case, yet was very careful to ALWAYS state something like "in that particular case." Leaving an opening for when he's on the SC, he can claim that Trump vs. the US is an entirely different case.

You know all those jokes about preveracating oily lawyers? Well Kav is one of them.

[CousinIT]

6. Why Brett Kavanaugh Is a Uniquely Suspicious Choice for the Supreme Court

https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/rachel-maddow-explains-why-brett-kavanaugh-uniquely-suspicious-choice-supreme

Maddow reminded viewers of one key fact about Kavanaugh: he is an executive-power maximalist at a moment when Trump wants protection.

Trump, who was recently named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the plea agreement that found his former attorney Michael Cohen guilty on multiple counts of bank fraud, tax evasion, and serious campaign finance violations, may soon have a justice on the Supreme Court who will rule aggressively in favor of the executive branch's immunity from investigation.

That Senate Republicans have no interest in weighing this risk is horrifying.

Link to tweet

Republicans could have picked from a lot of conservative judges, but only Kavanaugh has taken a particular position on the prosecution of a sitting president...

[asiliveandbreathe]

8. Then kav baby - could you be more specific....considering your opinion

during the Clinton subpoena era......and how this question is a hypothetical...according to you...shuckin' and ajivin' - as the OP suggests..answer the effin' question.....

[gordianot]

9. He has already answered that question in the one place he chose.

Crazy Town. Next question.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. Nothing hypothetical about that question.

It's a pending issue. PENDING ISSUE, PENDEJOS.

Find the right words to corner that oily bastard.

[bdamomma]

11. OMG

what total BS he is spewing can't answer the question???? Why is this guy even being considered for this position we have an illegal president.

[CaptainTruth]

12. Yes! United States v Nixon, unanimous SCOTUS decision.

[link:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon|

The fact that he won't answer tells us he's either dangerously ignorant of precedent, or he's shilling for Trump.