[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Medical Cannabis Superior to Opioids for Chronic Pain, Study Finds

Veterans Protest President Bush’s Receiving of Liberty Medal

Pentagon Fails Its First-Ever Official Audit

Wisconsin company gives employees guns for Christmas as gifts

Here’s What You’ll Pay for Neocon Wars: $5,900,000,000,000

Filing indicates indictment was prepared for Julian Assange

New Study On Schadenfreude Sheds Light On Darker Side Of Humanity

Roy Clark, 'Hee Haw' co-host, Country Music Hall of Fame member, dies at 85

Where Does the Constitution Call for Black-Robed Dictators?

Resisting the Campus Speech Nazis

Don’t Count on Americans Hating Each Other Any Less Post-Midterms

Justice Department reportedly preparing to charge Wikileaks' Julian Assange

Billionaire Uses $25 Million Yacht to Bring Supplies to Fire Victims But Police Don’t Let Him Ashore

HereÂ’s Why the NRA is Silent After Cops Killed a Legally Armed Black Man for Stopping a Mass Shooting

Ohio skin cancer survivor ticketed for tinted windows despite explaining health reasons

Interesting...California wildfires map lines up with proposed high speed rail for California

Financial Times tool warns if articles quote too many men

Liberal freak article The Ohio professor who's suing for the right to violate his LGBTQ students' rights

Near the Mexican border. Citizen reporter MEXICANS WILL FIGHT BACK not letting people exit buses

Michael Avenatti Arrested for Felony Domestic Violence

Fox News backs CNN in lawsuit against Trump White House

Judiciary Committee processes Trump nominees over Democrats' objections

Google bias

DOJ OLC Memo Re Designating an Acting Attorney General (14 Nov 2018) (Matthew Whitaker)

Trump has reportedly 'retreated into a cocoon of bitterness and resentment' after mounting midterm losses

Red Flag Gun Laws: Yet Another Government Weapon for Compliance and Control

The Toad and his minions met Monday to answer Mueller's questions:

Merkel calls for creation of ‘European army,’ backing Macron in spat with Trump

In their attempt to help ... the homeless - support liberals - stand for almost nothing hard to stand for --- they have become what they wanted - nothing.

Self-induced DISASTER: California fires the direct result of shortsighted environmentalist policies that prohibit forest management

CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta

As the US Spent $1.5 Million a Day to “Fight” Afghan Heroin Production, Heroin Output Quadrupled

Black security guard killed by police while he was stopping a bar shooting

Professor sues university for being ‘punished’ after calling female transgender student ‘sir’

They Hacked Their School District When They Were 12. The Adults Are Still Trying to Catch Up.

UN Demands Ban on Trump-style “Nationalist Populism”

12 targets as House Democrats prepare to investigate


Jerry Brown: Climate-Change Deniers 'Definitely Contributing' to the 'New Abnormal' of Wildfires

Fastest growing religion is ‘none’

Giving Food to the Homeless Shouldn’t Be a Crime

Michelle Obama: ‘I stopped even trying to smile’ during Trump’s inauguration

114 warrants served across Maryland since ‘red flag’ law went into effect in October ('Take the guns first, go through due process second' )

The Toad Played Central Role in Hush Payoffs to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal

What is the textbook definition of a democrat

Putin's Favorite Congressman Is A Loser

DOJ Charges Hotel with Discrimination for not Hiring Immigrant in Fraud-Infested Asylum Program

Matthew Whitaker is a crackpot

Larry King: "CNN Stopped Doing News A Long Time Ago"


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Grassley Announces Senate Confirmation Hearings on Kavanaugh September 4–7
Source: Breitbart
URL Source: https://www.breitbart.com/big-gover ... gs-on-kavanaugh-september-4-7/
Published: Aug 10, 2018
Author: Ken Klukowski
Post Date: 2018-08-10 17:40:24 by nolu chan
Keywords: None
Views: 113
Comments: 8

Grassley Announces Senate Confirmation Hearings on Kavanaugh September 4–7

by Ken Klukowski
10 Aug 2018
Washington, DC

WASHINGTON, DC – Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) announced on Friday that his Senate Judiciary Committee will hold hearings on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court on September 4 through 7, giving the Senate time to confirm him before the Supreme Court begins its annual term on October 1.

Opening statements from Kavanaugh and the senators on the committee will take place September 4. The senators will then question the nominee on September 5. The final part of the hearings will include testimony from national leaders in the legal community.

Democrats are expressing outrage at the schedule, saying that they have not had enough time or material to vet President Trump’s nominee, but those objections fall apart on the facts.

Grassley has presided over the most thorough vetting of any Supreme Court justice in U.S. history, and he says it is now time for his committee to prepare for public hearings.

Kavanaugh has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for 12 years. During that time he has authored 307 opinions, totaling 4,800 pages. He has also joined hundreds more, for a total of over 6,400 pages of additional judicial opinions. This comprehensive record of his legal philosophy has been in the public domain for years.

All that notwithstanding, Grassley has ensured that the Judiciary Committee took an extremely close look at Kavanaugh, and has reviewed hundreds of thousands of documents. While senators received 172,000 pages on Justice Elena Kagan and 184,000 pages on Justice Neil Gorsuch, lawmakers received an all-time record of over 900,000 pages of documents on Kavanaugh – the largest number of Executive Branch records ever submitted to the Senate for a Supreme Court nominee in American history.

Beyond that, Kavanaugh returned the most comprehensive, bipartisan Senate questionnaire in the history of the Judiciary Committee, providing 110 pages of answers to the committee’s questions. These answers were accompanied by an astounding 17,000 pages of documentation and supporting materials.


Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: nolu chan, WH DOJ cover up (#0)

Chuck Grassley Accused of ‘Cover-Up’ Regarding Secret Kavanaugh Documents

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has been accused of leading a “cover-up” over thousands of unreleased documents related to Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh‘s time in government.


Kavanaugh’s lengthy time in government has resulted in a massive paper trail. But many of those papers are currently inaccessible because the Trump administration is withholding tens of thousands of Kavanaugh-related documents.

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is currently withholding some 20,000 documents–and has notified interested parties that releasing such documents in line with the mandated timeline provided by the nation’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is unlikely to occur. Thousands of other Kavanaugh-related documents are presently being kept under wraps by the Department of Justice (DOJ)–which has so far refused to substantively answer FOIA requests as mandated by law.

900,000 pages is not enough to bury Kavanaugh's cover up of the Vince Foster murder.

Release the dirt and defeat confirmation.

hondo68  posted on  2018-08-10   19:15:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#2. To: hondo68 (#1)

Chuck Grassley Accused of ‘Cover-Up’ Regarding Secret Kavanaugh Documents

hondo68 accused of disseminating despicable Democrat propaganda

Kavanaugh’s lengthy time in government has resulted in a massive paper trail. But many of those papers are currently inaccessible because the Trump administration is withholding tens of thousands of Kavanaugh-related documents.

Thi repulsive and disgusting propaganda is is half-assed garbage. The Trump administration is withholding nothing that has been properly requested by the Senate committee.

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) is currently withholding some 20,000 documents–and has notified interested parties that releasing such documents in line with the mandated timeline provided by the nation’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) is unlikely to occur.

Here is where the propaganda bullshit becomes obvious to those familiar with the system. Why is the article citing the FOIA without explaining the bullshit nature of the article's propaganda?

The standard procedure is for the committee to request the documents from the National Records and Archives Administration (NARA), and it does not involve the FOIA. A request was made by the committee for 900,000 pages of documents, and NARA has already begun reviewing and supplying them.

Elections have consequences. As a result of the people electing a majority of Republicans to the Senate, all committee chairmen are Republicans, and all committees have Republican majorities.

NARA reviews and provides the requested documents on a priority basis to the Commmittee, as requested by the Committee. NARA estimates it will take until the end of October to finish reviewing and providing the 900,000 pages requested by the Committee.


National Archives may not finish reviewing Kavanaugh documents before end of October

By Grace Segers
CBS News
August 2, 2018, 2:14 PM

The National Archives informed the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Thursday that his request for documents regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh can't be fulfilled until the end of October. Chairman Chuck Grassley had asked for Kavanaugh's emails and paper filings from his time as Bush's associate White House counsel, and more documents pertaining to his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

National Archives General Counsel Gary Stern pointed out that this request far exceeded past document requests for other Supreme Court Justice candidates.

"The total volume of your request could be more than 900,000 pages," wrote general counsel Gary Stern. "By way of contrast, the total volume of records that NARA reviewed for the nomination of Justice Roberts was approximately 70,000 pages, and the volume for Justice Kagan's nomination was 170,000 pages."

Grassley had requested the documents to begin rolling production by August 1, to be completed by August 15. Democrats had also requested more documents from the National Archives from Kavanaugh's time as staff secretary to Bush. Stern said that the National Archives would complete its review of the first 300,000 pages by August 20, but the remaining 600,000 would not be completed until the end of October 2018.


NARA does NOT provide similar review and release of documents on a priority basis to individual members of a committee. There is no provision for the individual members to bypass the committee and obtain the same services.


National Archives denies Schumer request for Kavanaugh docs

By Bill Mears, Paulina Dedaj
Fox News
Auigust 3, 2018

The National Archives denied Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s request Friday for documents related to Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s time as staff secretary under George W. Bush.

The head of NARA, archivist David Ferriero, in a letter to Schumer, says the requests for certain sensitive documents for Kavanaugh’s time as Bush staff secretary need to come from the Judiciary Committee’s office, per longstanding precedent. The committee is at odds over the scope of documents from that period, the number of which could run into the hundreds of thousands.

Ferriero said the National Archives and Records Administration has declined to process similar requests from the lead Republicans on the Judiciary Committee in connection with the nominations of Attorney General Eric Holder and Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan during the administration of President Barack Obama.


NARA declined to process an irregular request from Cryin' Chuck Shumer which did not follow proper protocol and get processed through the Judiciary Committee.

The despicable Democrats are merely engaged in delaying tactics to push the nomination of the estimable Judge Kavanaugh past the midterm elections, in the desperate hope that they will then regain control of the Senate Judiciary committee and stop the nomination for unjustified partisan political reasons. In a disgusting move, these despicable Democrats have even called for the cessation of expediting the review process.


Senate Democrats: Stop Expediting Release of Kavanaugh’s White House Records

By Ed Whelan
National Review
August 10, 2018 12:16 PM

The Senate Judiciary Committee will receive an unprecedented volume of White House records on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. I’ve already addressed (in these three posts) Senate Democrats’ transparently obstructionist claim that the Committee should delay the confirmation process by many months in order to obtain the millions of pages of documents that passed through Kavanaugh’s office when he was White House staff secretary. I’ll address here the slipshod arguments that Senate Democrats are making against the provision of records from Kavanaugh’s years as White House counsel.

1. As this Washington Post article reports, Democrats are complaining that President George W. Bush has a team of lawyers involved in reviewing the documents. The Post article quotes this tweet from Senator Dick Durbin:

Take note: Unless it was produced by the National Archives, every document you see from Judge Kavanaugh’s White House tenure was selectively chosen for release by his former deputy, Bill Burck. This is not an objective process.

As Democrats surely know, the president whose White House records have been requested is always part of the process. President Obama issued the executive order that governs the disclosure of presidential records under the Presidential Records Act. Consistent with the Act, that executive order authorizes a former president to make a claim of executive privilege regarding requested records, and it further specifies that executive privilege covers records that reflect “the deliberative processes of the executive branch.”


On August 2, Burck sent the Committee 45,083 documents totaling 125,035 pages and stated in a cover letter that “President Bush has no objection to making these presidential records available to the public, subject to any concerns that NARA [the National Archives and Records Administration] may have in that respect.” (As Burck pointed out, “President Bush is under no obligation to produce records of his Administration but has authorized this production to assist the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in its assessment of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the United States Supreme Court.”)

On August 8, Burck further informed the Committee that he had learned from NARA that it was unable to conduct the requested review promptly. Therefore, Burck continued, “in the interests of expediting appropriate access,” President Bush and his team “are producing to the Committee on a rolling basis commencing today publicly releasable versions of documents that, in our view, do not contain information covered by a Presidential Records Act exemption or applicable privilege.”

3. Senate Democrats are complaining that, pending the Bush team’s executive-privilege review and NARA’s own review, documents that have not yet been deemed to be publicly releasable are temporarily being provided to the Committee on a “committee confidential” basis. Hmmm, why would Senate Democrats complain that Committee members—including, of course, the Democrats on the Committee—are receiving documents more quickly than they otherwise would? The Democrats’ game of obstruction and delay is transparent.


Of course, none of this had anything whatever to do with the FOIA.

Why did the half-assed propaganda article not explain where the FOIA came into all this? Because it jacks the propaganda bullshit all to hell.

Individual members of the Judiciary Committee can file FOIA requests as members of the public. Such individual requests from the public will not take precedent over the 900,000 page job that was dumped on NARA by the Judiciary Committee.

If the workload exceeds the ability of NARA to meet demand within the time set by the FOIA, you just get to wait. It happens to everybody, even Chuck Shumer and his Cryin' Choir. Take a number and get in line.


Senate Democrats file FOIA for documents on Trump's Supreme Court nominee

By Daniella Diaz
Updated 3:27 PM ET, Wed August 8, 2018

Washington (CNN) Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee filed several Freedom of Information Requests for records involving Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh during his time at the White House, the latest move in a partisan battle over trying to obtain documents related to the judge as part of his Senate confirmation process.

"This extraordinary step is a last resort -- unprecedented and unfortunate but necessary to fully and fairly review Judge Kavanaugh's nomination," Sen. Richard Blumenthal, who's on the committee, said in a statement. "I regret that Chairman (Chuck) Grassley has left us with no other choice. We need these documents to do our job."

Democrats are seeking records from Kavanaugh's time as an associate in the White House Counsel's office and as White House staff secretary.


The Freedom of Information Act requests were sent by Democratic Sens. Blumenthal, Feinstein, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Chris Coons of Delaware, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California.

Kavanaugh, who served as Bush's staff secretary for three years, touched thousands of documents during his time.

Democrats have demanded all the documents from Kavanaugh's time at the White House for review ahead of his confirmation, a request Republicans have said is a "fishing expedition" and a "delay tactic" for a nominee some Republicans say some Democrats have no intention of considering.


nolu chan  posted on  2018-08-10   23:22:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#3. To: nolu chan, slow FOIA disclosure, fast CONfirmation (#2)

Nolu sez: Better than a Leprechaun

The Donald's bipartisan Deep State drags it's feet on FOIA disclosure, as Grassley's hack commission kicks it up to Full Speed Ahead confirmation cover-up.

hondo68  posted on  2018-08-11   0:21:46 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#4. To: hondo68 (#3)

The Donald's bipartisan Deep State drags it's feet on FOIA disclosure, as Grassley's hack commission kicks it up to Full Speed Ahead confirmation cover-up.

Faced with facts, hondo68 makes up propaganda and tries to bullshit his way through with an ignorant claim of Deep State foot dragging on FOIA disclosure.

As was document at my #3, several individuals, in their individual capacities as members of the public, filed Freedom of Information Act requests on August 8, 2018. (Blumenthal, Feinstein,Leahy, Durbin, Whitehouse, Klobuchar, Coons , Hirono, Booker, and Harris.


Senate Democrats file FOIA for documents on Trump's Supreme Court nominee

By Daniella Diaz CNN Updated 3:27 PM ET, Wed August 8, 2018

Washington (CNN) Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee filed several Freedom of Information Requests for records involving Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh during his time at the White House, the latest move in a partisan battle over trying to obtain documents related to the judge as part of his Senate confirmation process.

The FOIA Requests of 8 August 2018, which is THREE (3) DAYS AGO. As a Saturday, today does not count as a day of handling by the receiving agency.

Please explain your ignorant and propagandist claim that there is FOIA foot dragging involved.

What is the earliest date that even a preliminary response could possibly be due for an FOIA request of 8 August 2018?


When all else fails, read the instructions.

See 36 CFR Ch. XII (7-1-11 Edition), § 1250.26(e):

(e) If you have requested Presidential records and NARA decides to grant you access, NARA must inform the incumbent and former Presidents of our intention to disclose information from those records. After receiving the notice, the incumbent and former Presidents have 30 days in which to decide whether or not to invoke Executive privilege to deny access to the information. NARA will send you an initial response to your FOIA request within 20 working days informing you of the status of your request. However, the final response to your FOIA can only be made at the end of the 30-day Presidential notification period.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presidential Records, FOIA, NARA FOIA Regs

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Executive Order 13489 - Presidential Records, Barack Obama (21 Jan 2009)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


nolu chan  posted on  2018-08-11   13:26:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#5. To: nolu chan, Vince Foster coverup, bushbot neocon progressive, Deep State swamp (#4)

The fix is in, the Grassley and The Donnell's plan, to install a radical leftist lifetime DC swamp critter, is proceeding right on schedule.

When Donald Trump started running for the Republican nomination for president in June 2015, he began by attacking the Republican establishment in Washington, and he began his attack by calling the establishment "the swamp."

His real target was the permanent government and its enablers in the legal, financial, diplomatic and intelligence communities in Washington. These entities hover around power centers no matter which party is in power.

Beneath the swamp, Trump argued, lies the deep state. This is a loose collection of career government officials who operate outside ordinary legal and constitutional frameworks and use the levers of government power to favor their own, affect public policy and stay in power. Though I did not vote for Trump -- I voted for the Libertarian candidate -- a part of me rejoiced at his election because I accepted his often repeated words that he would be a stumbling block to the deep state and he'd drain the swamp.

On Monday night, he rewarded the swamp denizens and deep state outliers by nominating one of their own to the Supreme Court.

Here is the back story.

The late Justice Antonin Scalia -- my friend during the final 10 years of his life -- and his neighbor and colleague Justice Anthony Kennedy often remarked to each other during the Obama years that each would like to leave the Supreme Court upon the election of a Republican president. Scalia's untimely death in February 2016 denied him that choice, but Kennedy bided his time.

When Trump was elected president, Kennedy told friends that he needed to await Trump's nominee to replace Scalia to gauge whether the judicially untested Trump could be counted upon to choose a nominee of Kennedy's liking and Scalia's standing.

Trump knew Kennedy's thinking, and that guided him in choosing Neil Gorsuch for Scalia's seat. Gorsuch believes in the primacy of the individual and natural rights and is generally skeptical of government regulators. He is also a former Kennedy clerk.

So the Gorsuch selection was intended to serve two purposes. The first was to pick a Scalia-like thinker for the court as candidate Trump had promised, and the second was to give Kennedy a comfort level so he could retire and give President Trump a second nominee. It worked.

When Kennedy paid an unprecedented visit to the Oval Office two weeks ago, ostensibly to tell the president of his intention to retire, he also had a secret purpose -- to recommend his replacement. The announcement of Kennedy's departure began a firestorm of lobbying in behalf of four people from a list of 25 potential nominees that Trump had published when searching for Scalia's replacement.

The idea of a published list is novel. But it cemented loyalty from conservatives to Trump, who, of course, had no track record in evaluating or appointing judicial nominees. The standards used to put names on the list involved examining academic credentials and published works and, with the exception of one person, requiring judicial experience with a traditionalist bent, even if brief.

Social and religious conservatives pushed the president to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett, a fiercely Catholic mother of seven and former Notre Dame Law School professor who is a known opponent of abortion. Intellectual conservatives pushed for Judge Raymond Kethledge, a philosopher like Justice Gorsuch who believes in the primacy of the individual and who recognizes natural rights. The president's sister Judge Maryanne Trump Barry had her brother convinced that her colleague Judge Thomas Hardiman, a blue-collar diamond-in-the-rough conservative, would fulfill his promise to his base.

But at the last minute, a gaggle of Washington lawyers and lobbyists -- called the establishment when you agree with them and the swamp when you don't -- persuaded the president to reject his commitment to his sister and nominate Judge Brett Kavanaugh. He is the man Justice Kennedy had asked the president to nominate and is another former Kennedy clerk.

The suspense over all this was palpable earlier this week. The showman in the president beat a drum so effectively last weekend that we all watched with excited pulse rates on Monday night. I was and remain extremely disappointed. Donald Trump -- whatever you think of him as a president -- has been utterly faithful to his campaign promises in foreign and domestic policy. Until now.

Now he has given us a nominee to the highest court in the land who typifies the culture he railed against when he claimed he'd drain the swamp. This man and this culture accept cutting holes in the Fourth Amendment because they don't believe that it should protect privacy. This man and this culture accept unlimited spying on innocent Americans by the National Security Agency because they don't believe that the NSA is subject to the Constitution.

This man and this culture even looked the other way in the face of deep state shenanigans against President Trump himself. This man and this culture accept the federal regulation of health care and its command that everyone buy health insurance, called Obamacare. This man and this culture embrace the Nixonian mantra that if the president does it, it is not illegal.

What happened here?

The Kavanaugh nomination is not a question of his qualifications; it is a question of his values. It is dangerous for judges to embrace values that diminish personal freedom rather than expand it. When they do that, they reveal their view that freedom comes from the government, not from within us. Thomas Jefferson and all the Founding Fathers profoundly rejected the government-as-source-of-freedom argument, but Judge Kavanaugh accepts it.

Jefferson once remarked that unless you pick someone's pocket or break someone's leg, no one should care how you exercise your freedom or pursue happiness. I wish the president had nominated a person who believes that, as well. But he didn't.

Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. 

hondo68  posted on  2018-08-11   14:12:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#6. To: hondo68 (#5)

Practice saying Justice Kavanaugh.

nolu chan  posted on  2018-08-13   19:01:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#7. To: nolu chan, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#6)

Practice saying

President Warren

hondo68  posted on  2018-08-13   20:13:26 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

#8. To: hondo68 (#7)

President Warren

Is that your replacement for those years of practicing to say President Hillary Clinton?

Come back to reality. Fauxcahontas ain't ever gonna win.

nolu chan  posted on  2018-08-13   21:51:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com