Sorry, there's no punchline to this JOKE. It's just a display of bumbling FOOLS at the CIRCUS, we call the US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!
Way back on Jul 9, 2018 Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Nearly two months have passed since then, but the following transcript excerpts and video evidence show that:
(00:16:07) Cory Booker - the Democrats delayed until Aug 24, just 11 days before the confirmation hearing, before asking Chuck Grassley for a meeting;
(00:16:07) Cory Booker - Democrat members claim that they did not receive documents, but a video posted Tue Sep 4, 2018 at 01:24 shows Dianne Feinstein and fellow Democrats in "protest [of] the release of thousands of documents overnight", on Sep 3. Feinstein announces, in this video that 42,000 documents had been sent, but "obviously no one has had time to look at them yet";
(00:20:59) Patrick Leahy - contradicts Feinstein's claim that "no one has had time to look at them yet" by critiquing the 'integrity' of the documents that he apparently looked at;
(00:19:58) Sheldon Whitehouse - complains that there are 100,000 more documents that have not been given to the Democrats, and raises questions about 'executive privilege', although without clarifying the source of this rumor;
(00:23:22) Chuck Grassley - affirms that the Republicans received the same 42,000 documents - no more than the Democrats - at the same time as the Democrats and completed their reviews of them, processing 12 years worth of Kavenaugh's judicial service.
CONCLUSION: If the Democrats are so uncertain about Kavanaugh's credentials and so inefficient in reading, they should have acted within days of his nomination to request, collect and read documents. Their failure to do so is strong indication of the Democrats' INCOMPETENCE and WILLFUL NEGLIGENCE in performing their duty as the Opposition Party. THEY failed, but they also want the Majority Party to pick up their slack, by extending them more time to do what the Majority Party accomplish with the same resources and within the same time frame.
To somehow disguise the Democrats' incompetence and willful negligence there is also evidence that they PAID hecklers to DISRUPT the hearing.
Texas Doctors Say They Saw Kavanaugh Protesters Being Paid Off Before Hearing
Image shows woman who was later arrested being given cash
Paul Joseph Watson | Infowars.com - September 5, 2018
Source: https://www.infowars.com/texas-doctors-say-they-saw-kavanaugh-protesters-being-paid-off-before-hearing/
Excepts from the transcripts published September 4, 2018 of the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing, Day 1, Part 1
Part one, day one of Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing got underway with protests from Democratic committee members and those in the public seating area of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing room. Senators also made opening statements.
Source: https://www.c-span.org/video/?449704-1/brett-kavanaugh-confirmation-hearing-begins-amid-democratic-objections-public-protests&start=1402
(00:16:07) Cory Booker: THIS COMMITTEE IS A VIOLATION OF THE VALUES I HAVE HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THE IDEALS WE SHOULD HAVE. WHAT IS THE RUSH? WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO HIDE MY NOT HAVING THE DOCUMENTS OUT FRONT? WHAT IS THE RUSH? WHAT ARE WE HIDING BY NOT LETTING THOSE DOCUMENTS CANNOT? SIR, THIS COMMITTEE IS A VIOLATION OF THE VALUES WE AS A COMMITTEE HAVE STRIVEN FOR MY TRANSPARENCY. WE ARE RUSHING THROUGH THIS PROCESS IN A WAY THAT IS UNNECESSARY, AND I APPEAL FOR THE PROMOTION TO AT LEAST -- FOR THE MOTION TO AT LEAST BE VOTED ON. LET US AT LEAST HAVE A VOTE.
WHEN WE WROTE YOU A LETTER AUGUST 24 ASKING TO HAVE A MEETING ON THIS ISSUE, YOU DENIED US EVEN THE RIGHT TO MEET, SO HERE WE ARE HAVING A MEETING.
LET'S AT LEAST DEBATE THIS ISSUE. LET'S AT LEAST CALL FOR A VOTE. I APPEAL TO YOUR SENSE OF FAIRNESS AND DECENCY, THE COMMITMENT YOU'VE MADE TO TRANSPARENCY. THIS VIOLATES WHICH YOU HAVE EVEN SET AND CALLED FOR, SIR.
YOU HAVE CALLED FOR DOCUMENTS, YOU YOURSELF, LIMITED DOCUMENTS. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE DOCUMENT YOU HAVE EVEN CALLED FOR. SIR, BASED UPON YOUR OWN PRINCIPLES, YOUR OWN VALUES, I CALL FOR AT LEAST TO HAVE A DEBATE OR A VOTE ON THESE ISSUES AND NOT FOR US TO RUSH THROUGH THIS PROCESS. [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE]
(00:19:58) Sheldon Whitehouse: MR. CHAIRMAN, UNDER REGULAR ORDER, MAY I ASK A POINT OF ORDER, WHICH IS THAT WE ARE NOW PRESENTED WITH A SITUATION IN WHICH SOMEBODY HAS DECIDED THAT THERE ARE 100,000 DOCUMENTS PROTECTED BY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE , YET THERE HAVE NOT BEEN AN ASSERTION OF EXECUTIVE OR GLITCH BEFORE THE COMMITTEE -- EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. HOW ARE WE TO DETERMINE WHETHER EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE HAS BEEN PROPERLY ASSERTED IS THIS HEARING GOES BY WITHOUT THE COMMITTEE EVER CONSIDERING THAT QUESTION? WHY IS IT NOT IN REGULAR ORDER FOR US TO DETERMINE BEFORE THE HEARING AT WHICH THE DOCUMENTS WOULD BE NECESSARY WHETHER OR NOT THE ASSERTION OF PRIVILEGE THAT PREVENTS US FROM GETTING THOSE DOCUMENTS IS LEGITIMATE OR INDEED IS EVEN AN ACTUAL ASSERTION OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE? I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY THAT IS NOT A LEGITIMATE POINT OF ORDER AT THIS POINT BECAUSE AT THE END OF THIS HEARING IT IS TOO LATE TO CONSIDER IT.
(00:20:59) Patrick Leahy: MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MIGHT ADD TO THIS, ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE DOCUMENTS WE'VE RECEIVED, THERE REALLY IS NO INTEGRITY. THEY HAVE ALTERATIONS. EMAILS ARE CUT OFF HALFWAY THROUGH A CHAIN. RECIPIENT NAMES ARE MISSING. MANY OF INTEREST TO THIS COMMUNITY ARE CUT OFF. THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES HASN'T HAD A CHANCE TO GET OFF ALL THAT WE WANT, EVEN THOUGH IT SAID ON THEIR WEBSITE THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES WOULD ACT AGAINST A CHECK AGAINST ANY POLITICAL INTERFERENCE.
(00:23:22) Chuck Grassley - AS THE SUPREME COURT HAS PUT IT, "UNLESS THE PRESIDENT CAN GIVE HIS ADVISERS SOME ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY, A PRESIDENT CANNOT EXPECT TO RECEIVE THE FULL AND FRANK OPINIONS AND FACTS UPON WHICH THE DISCHARGE OF HIS DUTIES DEPENDS." THE ISSUES JUDGE KAVANAUGH WORKED ON ARE EXACTLY THE SORT OF ISSUES THAT REQUIRE, ACCORDING TO THE SPRING COURT, "SOME ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY." WE IN THE SENATE, AND EVERYONE ELSE IN AMERICA, EXPECT EXACTLY THE SAME SORT OF CONFIDENTIALITY. MOST SENATORS WOULD NOT AGREE TO TURN OVER THEIR STAFF'S COMMUNICATION TO ANYONE. FOR EXAMPLE, WE DIDN'T ASK THAT JUDGE KAGAN'S RECORDS FOR HER SERVICE WITH THEN SENATOR BIDEN BE TURNED OVER DURING HER NOMINATION. AND BECAUSE OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, EVERYBODY HAS A RIGHT TO KEEP COMMUNICATIONS FROM THEIR LOITERS -- FROM THEIR LAWYERS OUT OF GOVERNORS' HANDS. WE THEREFORE DID NOT ASK FOR JUSTICE GINSBURG'S DOCUMENTS FROM HER TIME WITH THE ACLU. WE DID NOT ASK FOR JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR'S DOCUMENTS FROM HER TIME. IT COULD BE THAT THE SENATE AND ACLU ARE SUBJECT TO MORE PRODUCTION THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
AND THEN I WILL SPEAK TO THE FACT OF ABOUT 42,000 PAGES. LAST NIGHT WE RECEIVED ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FOR THE COMMITTEE'S REVIEW, REQUESTED BEFORE THE HEARING, AND WE RECEIVED THEM BEFORE THE HEARING JUST AS WE REQUESTED. THE MAJORITY STAFF BEGAN REVIEWING THE DOCUMENTS AS SOON AS THEY ARRIVED AND HAS ALREADY COMPLETED THIS REVIEW. THERE IS, THUS, ABSOLUTELY NO REASON -- THAT IS NO REASON TO DELAY THE HEARING. WE HAVE RECEIVED AND READ EVERY PAGE OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH'S EXTENSIVE PUBLIC RECORD. THIS INCLUDES 12 YEARS OF JUDICIAL SERVICE ON THE MOST IMPORTANT CIRCUIT COURT IN THE COUNTRY, WHERE HE AUTHORED 307 OPINIONS AND JOINED HUNDREDS MORE, AMOUNTING TO MORE THAN 1000 PAGES OF JUDICIAL WRITING. WE ALSO RECEIVED AND READ MORE THAN 17,000 PAGES OF HIS SPEECHES, ARTICLES, TEACHING MATERIALS, OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH SUBMITTED WITH HIS QUESTIONNAIRE, THE MOST ROBUST THIS COMMITTEE HAS EVER ISSUED. AND OF COURSE, WE RECEIVED AND READ MORE THAN 483,000 PAGES OF DOCUMENTS FROM JUDGE KAVANAUGH'S EXTENSIVE EXECUTIVE BRANCH SERVICE.
THIS IS MORE PAGES THAN THE LAST FIVE SUPREME COURT NOMINEES COMBINED. IN SHORT, THIS COMMITTEE HAS MORE MATERIALS OR JUDGE KAVANAUGH'S DOMINATION THAN WE HAVE HAD ON ANY SUPREME COURT NOMINEE IN HISTORY -- NOMINATION THAN WE HAVE HAD ON ANY SUPREME COURT NOMINEE IN HISTORY.
SENATORS HAVE HAD THE ADEQUATE MATERIALS AND TIME TO ASSESS JUDGE KAVANAUGH'S QUALIFICATIONS, AND THAT IS WHY I PROCEED. YOU ARE RIGHTLY PROUD OF THE JUDGE. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET TO DIRECTLY HEAR FROM JUDGE KAVANAUGH LATER THIS AFTERNOON AFTER THIS HEARING IN COMPETITION PROCESS IS FINISHED. I EXPECT JUDGE KAVANAUGH WILL BECOME THE NEXT ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT. WELCOME AGAIN, JUDGE. BEFORE I BEGIN, I WOULD WANT TO GIVE YOU, JUDGE, AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE YOUR FAMILY.
JUDGE KAVANAUGH: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN AND SENATOR FEINSTEIN --
Democrats protest Kavanaugh document access
Tue Sep 4, 2018 - 01:24
Senate Democrat Dianne Feinstein joined colleagues ahead of Tuesday's Senate confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, to protest the release of thousands of documents overnight that they said, they had no time to review. Rough Cut (no reporter narration).
Source: https://www.reuters.com/video/2018/09/04/democrats-protest-kavanaugh-document-acc?videoId=461136693&feedType=VideoRSS&feedName=LatestVideosUS&videoChannel=117764
Also published at Minds.com
Get your Internet Bill of Rights Protected Blog
+ Newsfeed + Video Channel + Messenger + Ethereum ERC-20 Utility Token Wallet
TODAY!