• Democrats Demanded Millions Of Kavanaugh Records, But Stay Mum On Biden

    From Ubiquitous@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 1 21:05:07 2020
    XPost: alt.tv.pol-incorrect, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.democrats XPost: alt.politics.usa

    The hypocrisy of Democrats, and their media allies, is on prominent
    display in their handling of sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden
    versus their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Another example of the
    hypocrisy relates to the demand, or lack thereof, for documents related
    to the official government work of the two men.

    Until they switched at the last minute to Christine Blasey Ford’s
    allegation, Democrats’ main message and procedural complaint against
    Kavanaugh was that they needed to review millions of public records from
    his time of service in the executive branch. It was the basis for their theatrics in the first round of nomination hearings in the Senate
    Judiciary Committee. At issue was whether these documents were covered
    by executive privilege, and what kind of precedent it would create to be exchanging these documents between the branches of government. It wasn’t
    a new argument, but one that rears its head in confirmation battles.

    For example, Cory Booker stunned the Senate Judiciary Committee on
    September 6, 2018, by announcing even before questioning began that he
    would violate Senate rules by releasing emails that had been marked
    “committee confidential.” His “Spartacus” moment, as he called it,
    followed months of battles over how many of documents related to
    Kavanaugh’s work for the president had to be turned over to the
    committee.

    Committees usually seek paperwork when they’re trying to learn more
    about nominees whose judicial views are unclear. That wasn’t the case
    with Kavanaugh, who had spent 12 years as a prominent federal judge,
    with 307 opinions of his to peruse. If senators were curious about
    Kavanaugh’s judicial opinions, they could simply read them. By contrast,
    when Elena Kagan was nominated to the Court by Barack Obama, she had no opinions to her name and limited writings because she had never served
    as a judge. Her paperwork during her time in the executive branch was of relatively more importance.

    Paperwork from early in Kavanaugh’s career as a government lawyer and presidential aide said less about how he’d be as a judge than the 12
    years he spent as a federal judge. Beyond that, Kavanaugh had more
    papers in the government record than other nominees. He’d served on Ken
    Starr’s Whitewater investigation, in the White House counsel’s office,
    and as staff secretary in the George W. Bush White House. Technically
    staff secretaries have millions of papers come across their desk, even
    if they have nothing to do with the authorship of those papers.
    Nonetheless, Charles Grassley set about obtaining those papers because Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee said they needed to review
    them.

    All papers had to go through multiple presidential reviews on account of
    how they affected multiple presidencies. The Whitewater papers, having previously been combed over, were easiest to produce and showed
    Kavanaugh in a favorable light. He had argued against releasing
    personally embarrassing details about President William Jefferson
    Clinton’s sexual misconduct, for example.

    Grassley hired an “e-discovery” firm, marking the first time such
    techniques would be used in a Supreme Court confirmation process. He put together a team of dozens of staffers to go through the documents,
    working out of a windowless, rat-infested, cinder-block suite in the
    basement of the Senate’s Dirksen Office Building. Democrats still
    claimed it wasn’t enough.

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer held a press conference on July 31,
    joined by Dick Durbin and Dianne Feinstein and assorted leaders of
    left-wing activist groups. He posed with a small pile of empty boxes
    labeled “missing records” and said he wanted to see them filled with Kavanaugh’s papers from his time as White House staff secretary.

    “I want to make clear, for just a sec, how aggressive the obstruction
    is,” Schumer said.

    A few days later, Republicans posed with 167 boxes representing the
    hundreds of thousands of pages that were being made available to the
    committee in easy-to-search digital form.


    “If you were to stack up all these pages, it would be taller than the
    Big Ben, taller than the Statue of Liberty, taller than the Capitol
    dome, and taller than the Taj Mahal,” noted Sen. Thom Tillis of North
    Carolina. “I think it’s more than enough for the Democrats to make a
    rational decision about supporting Judge Kavanaugh.”

    When the hearings finally began on September 4, Chairman Grassley barely
    began speaking before Sen. Kamala Harris of California interrupted him
    to complain there hadn’t been enough time to review a tranche of 42,000 Kavanaugh documents that had recently been released. Sen. Mazie Hirono
    of Hawai interrupted next to ask that the hearing be postponed so that
    she could review the documents. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
    called the hearing a charade and mockery. And Booker began complaining
    about the documents as Grassley calmly told him he was out of order.
    “What is the rush? What are we trying to hide?” Booker asked.

    NBC News had previously reported that Schumer had orchestrated the
    Democratic protests over paperwork and Sen. Christopher Coons of
    Delaware told media outlets “It was important that we lay down a marker
    that this hearing is not a normal hearing.”

    Booker performed his “Spartacus moment” a couple of days later, tweeting
    out links to documents that had been marked “committee confidential,”
    meaning they could be reviewed by the committee but not released
    publicly, per an agreement with the executive branch. There was nothing
    to connect Booker’s situation with the famous scene from the 1960 Kirk
    Douglas movie in which a group of slaves all claim to be the outlaw
    Spartacus to help the real Spartacus avoid being crucified. The emails themselves were a dud but Booker tried to make a big deal out of them.
    “I knowingly violated the rules put forward,” he bragged. He technically
    hadn’t even violated any rules, having been authorized by an official at
    the Bush library to release them hours prior.

    The bottom line is that Democrats were certainly eager to get their
    hands on every last scrap of paper that had been within a six-foot
    radius of Kavanaugh, even if only as a delay and spectacle tactic
    against Kavanaugh. Democrats and their media allies also pored over
    Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook and personal notes he wrote friends as
    a teenager.

    How is that standard being applied to Biden now that his official
    records are at the heart of a major controversy? To date, not one of the
    Senate Democrats who demanded that the Kavanaugh team spend months
    supplying them with paperwork have so much as mentioned the fact that
    Biden is hiding relevant documents at the University of Delaware. These
    are not documents where significant constitutional or legal precedent
    issues are at stake, unlike the battle over the documents in the
    Kavanaugh confirmation. The stakes are purely political. Nor is there an
    issue about who owns the documents and has the right to release them.
    Biden controls access to these papers, which he has granted to campaign operatives.

    Biden — who opposed the Kavanaugh confirmation, said of Blasey Ford that
    he presumed “the essence of what she’s talking about is real,” and
    demanded an FBI investigation into the allegation — refuses to supply
    any papers from his 36 years as a United States Senator or 8 years as
    Vice President of the United States. That would cover any papers dealing
    with his handling of Tara Reade, his employee who accuses him of a 1993
    sexual assault, and his handling of the Clarence Thomas confirmation
    hearings that were turned into a circus through an unsubstantiated claim
    of sexual harassment.

    “Millions of documents provided by thee but none by me,” is the
    Democrats’ apparent standard.


    --
    Every American should want President Trump and his administration to
    handle the coronavirus epidemic effectively and successfully. Those who
    seem eager to see the president fail and to call every administration
    misstep a fiasco risk letting their partisanship blind them to the
    demands not only of civic responsibility but of basic decency.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From NoBody@21:1/5 to All on Sun May 3 09:14:35 2020
    XPost: alt.tv.pol-incorrect, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.democrats XPost: alt.politics.usa

    On Fri, 01 May 2020 21:05:07 -0400, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net>
    wrote:

    The hypocrisy of Democrats, and their media allies, is on prominent
    display in their handling of sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden >versus their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Another example of the
    hypocrisy relates to the demand, or lack thereof, for documents related
    to the official government work of the two men.

    Until they switched at the last minute to Christine Blasey Ford’s
    allegation, Democrats’ main message and procedural complaint against >Kavanaugh was that they needed to review millions of public records from
    his time of service in the executive branch. It was the basis for their >theatrics in the first round of nomination hearings in the Senate
    Judiciary Committee. At issue was whether these documents were covered
    by executive privilege, and what kind of precedent it would create to be >exchanging these documents between the branches of government. It wasn’t
    a new argument, but one that rears its head in confirmation battles.

    For example, Cory Booker stunned the Senate Judiciary Committee on
    September 6, 2018, by announcing even before questioning began that he
    would violate Senate rules by releasing emails that had been marked >“committee confidential.” His “Spartacus” moment, as he called it,
    followed months of battles over how many of documents related to
    Kavanaugh’s work for the president had to be turned over to the
    committee.

    Committees usually seek paperwork when they’re trying to learn more
    about nominees whose judicial views are unclear. That wasn’t the case
    with Kavanaugh, who had spent 12 years as a prominent federal judge,
    with 307 opinions of his to peruse. If senators were curious about >Kavanaugh’s judicial opinions, they could simply read them. By contrast,
    when Elena Kagan was nominated to the Court by Barack Obama, she had no >opinions to her name and limited writings because she had never served
    as a judge. Her paperwork during her time in the executive branch was of >relatively more importance.

    Paperwork from early in Kavanaugh’s career as a government lawyer and >presidential aide said less about how he’d be as a judge than the 12
    years he spent as a federal judge. Beyond that, Kavanaugh had more
    papers in the government record than other nominees. He’d served on Ken >Starr’s Whitewater investigation, in the White House counsel’s office,
    and as staff secretary in the George W. Bush White House. Technically
    staff secretaries have millions of papers come across their desk, even
    if they have nothing to do with the authorship of those papers.
    Nonetheless, Charles Grassley set about obtaining those papers because >Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee said they needed to review
    them.

    All papers had to go through multiple presidential reviews on account of
    how they affected multiple presidencies. The Whitewater papers, having >previously been combed over, were easiest to produce and showed
    Kavanaugh in a favorable light. He had argued against releasing
    personally embarrassing details about President William Jefferson
    Clinton’s sexual misconduct, for example.

    Grassley hired an “e-discovery” firm, marking the first time such
    techniques would be used in a Supreme Court confirmation process. He put >together a team of dozens of staffers to go through the documents,
    working out of a windowless, rat-infested, cinder-block suite in the
    basement of the Senate’s Dirksen Office Building. Democrats still
    claimed it wasn’t enough.

    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer held a press conference on July 31, >joined by Dick Durbin and Dianne Feinstein and assorted leaders of
    left-wing activist groups. He posed with a small pile of empty boxes
    labeled “missing records” and said he wanted to see them filled with >Kavanaugh’s papers from his time as White House staff secretary.

    “I want to make clear, for just a sec, how aggressive the obstruction
    is,” Schumer said.

    A few days later, Republicans posed with 167 boxes representing the
    hundreds of thousands of pages that were being made available to the >committee in easy-to-search digital form.


    “If you were to stack up all these pages, it would be taller than the
    Big Ben, taller than the Statue of Liberty, taller than the Capitol
    dome, and taller than the Taj Mahal,” noted Sen. Thom Tillis of North >Carolina. “I think it’s more than enough for the Democrats to make a
    rational decision about supporting Judge Kavanaugh.”

    When the hearings finally began on September 4, Chairman Grassley barely >began speaking before Sen. Kamala Harris of California interrupted him
    to complain there hadn’t been enough time to review a tranche of 42,000 >Kavanaugh documents that had recently been released. Sen. Mazie Hirono
    of Hawai interrupted next to ask that the hearing be postponed so that
    she could review the documents. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut
    called the hearing a charade and mockery. And Booker began complaining
    about the documents as Grassley calmly told him he was out of order.
    “What is the rush? What are we trying to hide?” Booker asked.

    NBC News had previously reported that Schumer had orchestrated the
    Democratic protests over paperwork and Sen. Christopher Coons of
    Delaware told media outlets “It was important that we lay down a marker
    that this hearing is not a normal hearing.”

    Booker performed his “Spartacus moment” a couple of days later, tweeting
    out links to documents that had been marked “committee confidential,”
    meaning they could be reviewed by the committee but not released
    publicly, per an agreement with the executive branch. There was nothing
    to connect Booker’s situation with the famous scene from the 1960 Kirk >Douglas movie in which a group of slaves all claim to be the outlaw
    Spartacus to help the real Spartacus avoid being crucified. The emails >themselves were a dud but Booker tried to make a big deal out of them.
    “I knowingly violated the rules put forward,” he bragged. He technically >hadn’t even violated any rules, having been authorized by an official at
    the Bush library to release them hours prior.

    The bottom line is that Democrats were certainly eager to get their
    hands on every last scrap of paper that had been within a six-foot
    radius of Kavanaugh, even if only as a delay and spectacle tactic
    against Kavanaugh. Democrats and their media allies also pored over >Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook and personal notes he wrote friends as
    a teenager.

    How is that standard being applied to Biden now that his official
    records are at the heart of a major controversy? To date, not one of the >Senate Democrats who demanded that the Kavanaugh team spend months
    supplying them with paperwork have so much as mentioned the fact that
    Biden is hiding relevant documents at the University of Delaware. These
    are not documents where significant constitutional or legal precedent
    issues are at stake, unlike the battle over the documents in the
    Kavanaugh confirmation. The stakes are purely political. Nor is there an >issue about who owns the documents and has the right to release them.
    Biden controls access to these papers, which he has granted to campaign >operatives.

    Biden — who opposed the Kavanaugh confirmation, said of Blasey Ford that
    he presumed “the essence of what she’s talking about is real,” and
    demanded an FBI investigation into the allegation — refuses to supply
    any papers from his 36 years as a United States Senator or 8 years as
    Vice President of the United States. That would cover any papers dealing
    with his handling of Tara Reade, his employee who accuses him of a 1993 >sexual assault, and his handling of the Clarence Thomas confirmation
    hearings that were turned into a circus through an unsubstantiated claim
    of sexual harassment.

    “Millions of documents provided by thee but none by me,” is the
    Democrats’ apparent standard.

    Notice the complete silence on this issue from the usual suspects
    around here?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From super70s@21:1/5 to Ubiquitous on Sun May 3 09:31:15 2020
    XPost: alt.tv.pol-incorrect, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.democrats XPost: alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics.usa

    On 2020-05-02 01:05:07 +0000, Ubiquitous said:

    The hypocrisy of Democrats, and their media allies, is on prominent
    display in their handling of sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden versus their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Another example of the
    hypocrisy relates to the demand, or lack thereof, for documents related
    to the official government work of the two men.


    How is that standard being applied to Biden now that his official
    records are at the heart of a major controversy? To date, not one of the Senate Democrats who demanded that the Kavanaugh team spend months
    supplying them with paperwork have so much as mentioned the fact that
    Biden is hiding relevant documents at the University of Delaware.

    Univ. of Delaware documents for Trump tax returns, even trade.

    Heh, didn't think so.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)