Democrats willing to sue over the documents proving that Trump's SCOTUS nominee lied to the Senate
newsdepo.com
Campaign Action Senate Democrats know that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath to them before, in 2006 during his confirmation hearing to sit on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. That lie is central to the documents fight they've been haviDemocrats willing to sue over the documents proving that Trump's SCOTUS nominee lied to the Senate
Campaign Action Senate Democrats know that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath to them before, in 2006 during his confirmation hearing to sit on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. That lie is central to the documents fight they've been having with Republicans, who are pushing Kavanaugh's confirmation hearing weeks before the National Archives can even produce the fraction of documents they're willing to allow. Democrats have been forced to unprecedented measures in trying to get the documents, having to file a Freedom of Information request from the National Archives and threatening a lawsuit if the documents aren't released ahead of the scheduled September 4 hearing. «We stand ready to sue the National Archives for Judge Kavanaugh’s full records if necessary,» Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said. «The American people deserve a methodical and thorough examination of a nominee to the Supreme Court who will yield immense influence on their lives.» Particularly when they know that that nominee lied to them previously about the degree to which he was involved in President George W. Bush's illegal activities in conducting the Iraq war, including torture and warrantless wiretapping, when he served as Bush's staff secretary. Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) raise that point in a letter to Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley. «As you know,» they write to Grassley, «in 2006, Judge Kavanaugh told the Committee under oath that he was 'not aware of any issues' regarding 'the legal justifications or the policies relating to the treatment of detainees'; was 'not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants'; had nothing to do with issues related to rendition; and was unaware of, and saw no documents related to, the warrantless wiretapping program conducted without congressional authorization.» But there's a little problem for Kavanaugh—and Grassley—here, the senators point out. Read more