Now this is more like it!

The Kavanaugh story never stops giving and today it is our old 'friend', A E-P from the Telegraph, who provides the first, and so far the best attack on the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.  If only the Dems had used this as an attack weapon instead of that silly woman they might have succeeded in stopping Kavanaugh's advance.  Mind you, as well as showing Kavanaugh in a bad light, it also serves  to remind us of the sordid, if not criminal, activities of the Clinton apparat during the investigations of the Starr enquiry into the murder/suicide of Vincent Foster, an intimate (shall we say?) friend of the Clintons.

Alas, I have no time at the moment to go into the details but I urge you to read A E-P's story.  If it holds up then there are indeed good grounds to reject Kavanaugh, certainly better ones than the incoherent memories of a 'psycho-babbling' woman whose 35 year old memory tale is slowly collapsing.

Read A E-P's story

 

 

Comments

[Whyaxye]

That's really scary, and very good journalism. It appears that on the sidewalk of American politics there are different kinds of dog poo, and people object to the stuff that befouls their own shoe. But it's all poo, and it stinks.

[Cuffleyburgers]

Morning Duffers. I read AEP with my breakfast cuppa, and what an insight it gives into the sordid cesspool that is Washington.

The problem is that anybody not willing to sell his soul for the proverbial 30 pieces of silver is unlikely ever to bob to the top of the tree and even get himself nominated.

I suspect that any of the current incumbents, or other potential nominees, if subject to the same forensic examination that Kavanaugh has been would come up smelling just as dodgy.

This has become a trial of strength between the (un)dems and the administration, which they mustn't be allowed to win.

Confirm the bastard and move on.

[Cuffleyburgers]

sorry for the mixed metaphor, trees and cesspools, rather clumsy.

[JK]

In Re Per Curiam:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/192/995/594136/

The pertinent finding is referenced in paragraph #11 generally and the Sovereign Immunity grant specifically.

Got to give Mrs. Feinstein's staff brownie points for going this obscure though.

[David Duff]

To save me time, JK, could you give me the essence of the point you are making, er, preferably in English rather than 'Arkielang'!

[JK]

Indeed, we [DC Circuit Court 1987 - jk] have said that "[t]he disclosure of information 'coincidentally before the grand jury which can be revealed in such a manner that its revelation would not elucidate the inner workings of the grand jury' is not prohibited."

https://casetext.com/case/senate-of-puerto-rico-v-us-dept-of-justice

Just on the offchance Feinstein's legal-eagles read D&N.

[Whitewall]

The proper purpose of the Judiciary Committee when presented with a SC nominee from Instapundit:

The Case For Kavanaugh. “In my view, senators are within their prerogative to reject Brett Kavanaugh because they disagree either with his originalism or with his willingness to invalidate unconstitutional laws. But I also believe that, if that is what they are doing, they have an obligation to specify exactly what it is about his judicial philosophy with which they disagree. And they can only do that by identifying what the senators believe to be the superior judicial philosophy. These are issues they failed even to raise during his confirmation hearing. Instead, we heard a lot from Democratic senators about particular case outcomes they hoped or feared Judge Kavanaugh would reach. But nothing about why such outcomes were more or less consistent with the written Constitution that he—and they—took an oath to support. In contrast, Republican Senators like Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Ben Sasse and John Kennedy engaged Judge Kavanaugh—in some cases critically—with his views of constitutional interpretation and precedent.”

This exposes the view of our Constitution and the deep dividing line between the political parties. For Democrats, the Constitution has become an obstacle to their ideology and exercise of power. Thus the inability of Dem members of the Committee to engage Kavanaugh. Other weapons had to be found.

[Bob]

Kavanaugh will likely be confirmed. The only thing that might prevent it would be the FBI finding he lied to the Senate.

[JK]

An FBI Finding? you say?

[Bob]

JK, Huh?

[JK]

The bureau won't be doing the stuff that is in the individual Senators' area of responsibilities. The Judiciary Committee is already in possession of the relevant transcripts.

[JK]

There's hints in the Twittersphere David I think y'all non-Yanks might get a real kick out of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaver_Synod

That's, apparently, the Democrats next move.

[Jimmy Glesga]

The Democrats in the USA must be resorting to digging up their own dirt as a last resort to get at Trump.Trump is on the ball as far as trade deals go.