Why was Brett Kavanaugh added to the Supreme Court List (and later nominated)?

Kavanaugh is, to my knowledge, to only candidate that has swamp origin; He is born and raised in Washington DC, went to Skull & Bones Yale Law School and worked for Skull & Bones George W. Bush.

Why would Donald Trump nominate a candidate that goes against his promise to drain the swamp?

WASHINGTON — When Donald J. Trump issued his final list of 21 potential nominees to the Supreme Court in September, he made a vow. “This list is definitive,” he said, “and I will choose only from it in picking future justices of the Supreme Court.”

…

In important ways, Mr. Trump’s candidates represent a sharp break from the current conservative justices, who all went to law school at Harvard or Yale and who all served on federal appeals courts in the Northeast or in California.

If the list has a main theme, it is that there are plenty of good judges who went to law school at places like Notre Dame, Marquette, the University of Georgia and the University of Miami.

…

Mr. Trump’s list has some striking omissions, among them Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and Paul D. Clement, who was solicitor general from 2005 to 2008 and often argues cases before the Supreme Court.

Their perceived drawbacks say a lot about Mr. Trump’s priorities. Mr. Malcolm, who proposed both men for the list, drew some conclusions.

In Judge Kavanaugh’s case, it probably did not help that he went to Yale Law School and sits in Washington. “They may have wanted to send a message that they are an outside-the-Beltway organization,” Mr. Malcolm said. “And then the other part of it, not quite as severe, was his opinion in one of the Obamacare cases.”

Judge Kavanaugh dissented from a decision upholding the health care law, but he did so on jurisdictional grounds. Ideological purity would have required him to vote to strike down the law on constitutional grounds.

…

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-justices.html

>>3178103

If they did, Trump is not stupid enough to fall for the trap.

My thinking is that Trump is using Kavanaugh to trap the swamp in some way. If so, Kavanaugh will not be voted in as SC judge.

>>3178164

>Also, if you recall on this board, anons were suspicious the very day that he was nominated. POTUS didn't seem himself. As I recall that was the consensus on this board at the time.

Even if he were, he has had plenty of time to change his decision.

I see no reason why Kavanaugh should be elected SC judge. I suspect that the delay we see now is according to plan, and I'm talking about Trumps plan.

>I wonder if Q left us any clues? As he often writes, "you have more than you know"

Not to my knowledge.

>>3178164

>I wonder if Q left us any clues? As he often writes, "you have more than you know"

>>3094453

>Due to K confirmation push.

>Hand in hand.

>[RR] stand down due to K conf.

>Q

What do Kavanaughs confirmation process has to do with Rosensteins stand down?

>>3178362

>What do Kavanaughs confirmation process has to do with Rosensteins stand down?

Q linked this article:

Devin Nunes: GOP Can’t Impeach Rosenstein Without Risking Kavanaugh Nomination

“It’s not a matter that any of us like Rosenstein … it’s a matter of timing,” the lawmaker said at a fundraising event.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) suggested at a fundraising dinner last week that Republicans were holding off on impeachment proceedings against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to avoid derailing Brett Kavanaugh’s speedy confirmation to the Supreme Court.

…

“So if we actually vote to impeach, OK, what that does is that triggers ― the Senate then has to take it up,” Nunes can be heard saying on the recording. “Do you want them to drop everything and not confirm the Supreme Court justice, the new Supreme Court justice? The Senate would have to drop everything they’re doing … and start with impeachment on Rosenstein. And then take the risk of not getting Kavanaugh confirmed.”

…

Source: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/devin-nunes-rosenstein-kavanaugh_us_5b6b9b3ee4b0bdd062063b76

That sounds like a made up reason to me. They allow sexual allegations based on very thin grounds to delay the confirmation.

How is that different from risking a delay by impeaching Rosenstein? And how will that delay the confirmation?

“Do you want them to drop everything and not confirm the Supreme Court justice, the new Supreme Court justice? The Senate would have to drop everything they’re doing … and start with impeachment on Rosenstein. And then take the risk of not getting Kavanaugh confirmed.”

Can the Senate only do one thing at a time?

No, it doesn't add up to me.

>>3178502

>>1973688

>Think SC vote to confirm (coming).

>No Name action.

>Every dog has its day.

>Enjoy the show.

>Q

What do Kavanaughs confirmation vote has to do with McCain?

>>3178691

Meaning Kavanaugh will not be confirmed without McCains vote?

>>3178678

>Needed NoName out before vote?

Why?

>Also, Kav will likely be on SC when the military trib begin and the cabal will sue to stop it, going all the way up to SC.

How can they sue? It is military tribunals in time of war. What is there to sue about?

>He will uphold EO by POTUS.

Kavanaughs track record of upholding the constitution is not great…

>>3178779

>A US citizen detained by the military as an enemy combatant is entitled to a hearing in Federal court to contest the enemy combatant determination before being remanded to the military court system. A denial could be appealed to the Supreme Court.

But why would they deny it? Sounds like the chance of a case hitting the SC is slim to none.