Will Kavanaugh Be Found Unmutual?

I saw this posted this morning on MeWe by Kevin Z. Williamson. The more I watched it, the more I thought The Prisoner was way ahead of its time and that it was a preview of what we might see today from certain members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Will Judge Kavanaugh be found to be disharmonious? Will he be deemed unmutual? Will DiFi remember to wear her top hat and stripes?

Ford's Prepared Testimony Before The Senate Judiciary Committee

Earlier today I published the prepared testimony of Judge Brett Kavanaugh which contained his unequivocal denial of participating in any and all sexual assaults. Needless to say, I believe him.

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's attorney has now posted her prepared testimony which is scheduled to be delivered before the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow. If this were the court of law instead of the court of public opinion, this case would never have even gotten to trial. As it is, this was meant to be the Democrat's bombshell revelation that would take down a good man and destroy his chances of serving on the Supreme Court. I imagine it was also intended to force him to step down from his position as a judge on the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. I think it will fail as well it should.

Dr. Ford Written Testimony by on Scribd

Judge Kavanaugh's Prepared Statement For Thursday's Senate Hearing

Judge Brett Kavanaugh's prepared testimony for his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee has been released. In it, he addresses the charges by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually attacked her at a party 36 years ago. He categorically denies it.

It is a strong statement but I wish he might have taken the approach of Justice Clarence Thomas and called it for what it is - bullshit. However, Kavanaugh is a more measured, judicious, and temperate person than I am which is why he's a judge and I'm not.

As posted at The Atlantic:

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Members of the Committee:

Eleven days ago, Dr. Ford publicly accused me of committing a serious wrong more than 36 years ago when we were both in high school. I denied the allegation immediately, unequivocally, and categorically. The next day, I told this Committee that I wanted to testify as soon as possible, under oath, to clear my name.

Over the past few days, other false and uncorroborated accusations have been aired. There has been a frenzy to come up with something—anything, no matter how far-fetched or odious—that will block a vote on my nomination. These are last-minute smears, pure and simple. They debase our public discourse. And the consequences extend beyond any one nomination. Such grotesque and obvious character assassination—if allowed to succeed—will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from serving our country.

As I told this Committee the last time I appeared before you, a federal judge must be independent, not swayed by public or political pressure. That is the kind of judge I am and will always be. I will not be intimidated into withdrawing from this process. This effort to destroy my good name will not drive me out. The vile threats of violence against my family will not drive me out. I am here this morning to answer these allegations and to tell the truth. And the truth is that I have never sexually assaulted anyone—not in high school, not in college, not ever.

Sexual assault is horrific. It is morally wrong. It is illegal. It is contrary to my religious faith. And it contradicts the core promise of this Nation that all people are created equal and entitled to be treated with dignity and respect. Allegations of sexual assault must be taken seriously. Those who make allegations deserve to be heard. The subject of allegations also deserves to be heard. Due process is a foundation of the American rule of law.

Dr. Ford’s allegation dates back more than 36 years, to a party that she says occurred during our time in high school. I spent most of my time in high school focused on academics, sports, church, and service. But I was not perfect in those days, just as I am not perfect today. I drank beer with my friends, usually on weekends. Sometimes I had too many. In retrospect, I said and did things in high school that make me cringe now. But that’s not why we are here today. What I’ve been accused of is far more serious than juvenile misbehavior. I never did anything remotely resembling what Dr. Ford describes.

The allegation of misconduct is completely inconsistent with the rest of my life. The record of my life, from my days in grade school through the present day, shows that I have always promoted the equality and dignity of women.

I categorically and unequivocally deny the allegation against me by Dr. Ford. I never had any sexual or physical encounter of any kind with Dr. Ford. I am not questioning that Dr. Ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in some place at some time. But I have never done that to her or to anyone. I am innocent of this charge.

The Committee Vote Is Friday

September 25, 2018

 

RESCHEDULED NOTICE OF COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING

 

        The Executive Business Meeting originally scheduled by the Committee on the Judiciary for Monday, September 24, 2018 at 10:00 a.m., in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building has been rescheduled for Friday, September 28 at 9:30 a.m.

 

        By order of the Chairman.

I. Nominees

Brett M. Kavanaugh, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States

Jonathan A. Kobes, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit

 

Kenneth D. Bell, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina

Stephanie A. Gallagher, to be United States District Judge for the District of Maryland

Mary S. McElroy, to be United States District Judge for the District of Rhode Island

Carl J. Nichols, to be United States District Judge for the District of Columbia

 

John M. O'Connor, to be United States District Judge for the Northern, Eastern and Western Districts of Oklahoma

 

Martha Maria Pacold, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois

 

Mary M. Rowland, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois

 

Steven C. Seeger, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois

II. Bills

S.2785, DETER Act (Durbin, Graham, Blumenthal, Cruz)

S. 3178, Justice for Victims of Lynching Act of 2018 (Harris, Scott, Feinstein, Leahy, Durbin, Whitehouse, Klobuchar, Coons, Blumenthal, Hirono, Booker)   

Grassley Statement On Kavanaugh's Accuser (Updated)

Sen. Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released a statement today regarding Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and her allegations of an attack by Judge Brett Kavanaugh while they were teenagers. The statement below does a good job at being respectful to Ford, calling out Dianne Feinstein and the Democrats, and nailing those in the media who leaked Ford's name. Grassley has always championed whistle blowers and he brings that credibility to this statement.

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley issued the following statement regarding the nomination of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

“Anyone who comes forward as Dr. Ford has deserves to be heard, so I will continue working on a way to hear her out in an appropriate, precedented and respectful manner.

“The standard procedure for updates to any nominee’s background investigation file is to conduct separate follow-up calls with relevant parties. In this case, that would entail phone calls with at least Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford. Consistent with that practice, I asked Senator Feinstein’s office yesterday to join me in scheduling these follow-ups. Thus far, they have refused. But as a necessary step in evaluating these claims, I’ll continue working to set them up.

“Unfortunately, committee Republicans have only known this person's identity from news reports for less than 24 hours and known about her allegations for less than a week. Senator Feinstein, on the other hand, has had this information for many weeks and deprived her colleagues of the information necessary to do our jobs. The Minority withheld even the anonymous allegations for six weeks, only to later decide that they were serious enough to investigate on the eve of the committee vote, after the vetting process had been completed.

“It’s deeply disturbing that the existence of these allegations were leaked in a way that seemed to preclude Dr. Ford’s confidentiality.

“Over my nearly four decades in the Senate I have worked diligently to protect whistleblowers and get to the bottom of any issue. Dr. Ford’s attorney could have approached my office, while keeping her client confidential and anonymous, so that these allegations could be thoroughly investigated. Nevertheless, we are working diligently to get to the bottom of these claims.”

UPDATE: A special meeting is scheduled for Monday and both Ford and Kavanaugh will appear.

Judiciary Committee to Hear from Kavanaugh, Ford in Public Hearing

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today announced that the Committee will hold a public hearing with Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.

“As I said earlier, anyone who comes forward as Dr. Ford has done deserves to be heard. My staff has reached out to Dr. Ford to hear her account, and they held a follow-up call with Judge Kavanaugh this afternoon. Unfortunately, committee Democrats have refused to join us in this effort. However, to provide ample transparency, we will hold a public hearing Monday to give these recent allegations a full airing,” Grassley said.

Below is the official notice for Monday’s hearing.

NOTICE OF COMMITTEE HEARING CONTINUATION

The Senate Committee on the Judiciary hearing on the nomination of the Honorable Brett M. Kavanaugh to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States will continue Monday, September 24, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 216 of the Hart Senate Office Building. By order of the Chairman.

A New Word For The Political Lexicon - Feinsteined

Ari Fleischer, former press secretary for Pres. George W. Bush, has come up with a new word for the political lexicon. It is Feinsteined. This is when an anonymous letter from an anonymous source with an unknown allegation is supposedly sent to the FBI in an effort to derail the nomination of a judicial candidate. In this case, the nominee is Judge Brett Kavanaugh and the allegations may or may not be something non-sexual he did at a party with a girl when he and she were 17 years old.

First came getting “Borked.” Now there is getting “Feinsteined.” A secret source. An unknown allegation (from high school) and an FBI referral. This isn’t advice and consent. It’s attack and burn. https://t.co/YKWlox1klo

— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) September 14, 2018

In the interest of full disclosure, I may or may not have gotten drunk at a New Year's Eve party when I was 17 and may or may not have kissed a girl at the stroke of midnight who was another guy's girlfriend and may or may not have gotten in trouble with my mom for coming home drunk from a party.

Day Two Of Project Gunwalker At Lynch's Confirmation Hearings

The second day of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings for Loretta Lynch featured nine witnesses who touched upon a number of things. There were the "Loretta was a great US Attorney and I felt fortunate to work with her comments" from attorney David Barlow and former FBI Assistant Director in Charge Janice Fedaryck. There was the "Loretta comes from a good Baptist family" testimony by Rev. Dr. Clarence Newsome. There was the testimony from law professor Stephen Legomsky that said he was "the" expert on immigration law and Obama's actions on making illegal aliens legal was OK with him.

Then there was what I consider the meat of the day:  the witnesses who described just bad the Department of Justice has gotten, how it has screwed people over, and how it has looked the other way at the abuses of power by the White House. Catherine Englebrecht of True the Vote described how the dogs of war were unleashed on her when she filed applications for non-profit status for two organizations. These "dogs of war" include the IRS, OSHA, the FBI, and BATFE. Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee discussed how the Department of Justice under Eric Holder was actively hostile to local law enforcement. He discussed how Holder and DOJ made the situation in Ferguson, Missouri worse by inserting itself where it had no business. Professor Nicholas Rosenkranz of Georgetown and the Cato Institute spoke about the role of the Attorney General in providing legal advice to the President and how Eric Holder has failed in this regard.

Then there was the testimony of Sharyl Attkisson and Professor Jonathan Turley. They were the bookends, so to speak, as they began and ended the testimony for the day. Leading off was Ms. Attkisson who described how she had been targeted by the Justice Department for her factually accurate reporting on
Operation Fast and Furious (among other things).

When I reported on factual contradictions in the administration’s accounts regarding Fast and Furious, pushback included a frenzied campaign with White House officials trying to chill the reporting by calling and emailing my superiors and colleagues, and using surrogate bloggers to advance false claims. One White House official got so mad, he angrily cussed me out.

The Justice Department used its authority over building security to handpick reporters allowed to attend a Fast and Furious briefing, refusing to clear me into the public Justice Department building.

Advocates had to file a lawsuit to obtain public information about Fast and Furious improperly withheld under executive privilege. Documents recently released show emails in which taxpayer paid White House and Justice Department press officials complained that I was “out of control,” and vowed to call my bosses to try to stop my reporting.

Let me emphasize that my reporting was factually indisputable. Government officials weren’t angry because I was doing my job poorly. They were panicked because I was doing my job well.

While the testimony of Ms. Attkisson was damning, I think the testimony of Prof. Jonathan Turley of George Washington University was even more damning of the Justice Department under Eric Holder. Turley admitted he voted for Obama and supported many of the Administration's policies. Turley is a DC insider. He appears on Sunday morning talk shows, he writes op-eds, he goes to the insider cocktail parties, and he rubs elbows with the powers that be.

Turley submitted a 26-page written testimony accusing the Justice Department of being the architect of the effort to expand the power of the presidency beyond what was Constitutional. He says that they actively attempt to block legislative authority and Congressional oversight. The most egregious example of this, in Turley's opinion, and the one that best captures the obstruction of Congress in recent years is Operation Fast and Furious. Turley devotes seven pages of his testimony to it.

However, the controversy that best captures the obstruction of Congress in recent years is the response of the Obama Administration in the Fast and Furious investigation. The reason that Fast and Furious is particularly illustrative is for a couple of salient factors. First, no one (not even General Holder) defends the Fast and Furious operation, which proved as lethal as it was moronic. It is a prototypical example of a program that is legitimately a focus of congressional oversight authority. A federal agency was responsible for facilitating the acquisition of powerful weapons by criminal gangs, including weapons later used to kill United States Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010. Congress has investigated not only the “gunwalking” operation, but also what it saw as concealment and obstruction, by the Administration, in its efforts to investigate the operation. Second, Congress had ample reason to expand its investigation after the Justice Department sent a letter on February 4, 2011 stating categorically that no gunwalking had taken place. It was not until December 2011 that Attorney General Holder informed Congress that it had been given false information and the letter was formally withdrawn. Congress responded by expanding the investigation into the false information given to it by the Executive Branch and the months of delay before Congress was informed of the misrepresentation of the facts underlying Fast and Furious. Finally, the position of the Justice Department on withholding documents has, in my view, been facially invalid and lacking in any credible good-faith interpretation of the executive privilege.

Turley goes on to say that one of the most troubling aspects of the Justice Department's behavior has been its refusal to prosecute the House of Representative's contempt citation against Eric Holder.

One of the most troubling aspects of the Fast and Furious investigation was not just the withholding of non-privileged material but the later refusal of the Justice Department to submit the alleged violation to a grand jury— despite a historic vote of the House of Representatives finding General Holder in contempt. The decision to block any prosecution was a violation of a long-standing agreement between the branches and represents a serious affront to the institutional authority of this body.

He goes on to attack the Obama Administration's circular reasoning cited for withholding requested documents saying "I have had criminal defense clients who would only envy such an ability to cite the basis for a criminal charge as the defense to a criminal charge."

I don't think any of the testimony given in day two of the hearings will derail Ms. Lynch's confirmation as the next Attorney General. I really have no doubt that she will be confirmed. I see this testimony as more an airing of grievances and an attempt to put the Administration on notice that a Republican-majority Senate - unlike the Democratic-majority Senate run by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) - is watching them.

Project Gunwalker Makes It Into Loretta Lynch's Confirmation Hearing

Project Gunwalker aka Operation Fast and Furious was mentioned today as the confirmation hearings for Loretta Lynch to become the 83rd Attorney General began. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) had this to say in his opening statement:

The Department’s own Inspector General listed as one of its top management challenges: “Restoring Confidence in the Integrity, Fairness, and Accountability of the Department.”

He cited several examples, including the Department falsely denying basic facts in the Fast and Furious controversy. The Inspector General concluded this “resulted in an erosion of trust in the Department.”

In that fiasco, our government knowingly allowed firearms to fall into the hands of international gun traffickers.

And it led to the death of a Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry.

And then, after Congress called on the leadership of the Department to account for this foolish operation, what did they do?

Did they apologize to the family and rush to uncover the truth?

Quite the opposite.

They denied, spun and hid the facts from Congress and the American people.

They bullied and intimidated whistleblowers, members of the press, and anyone who had the audacity to investigate and uncover the truth.

 You can listen to this in the live video of Lynch's hearings at the 25:00 to 26:09 marks.

While it won't bring back the lives of Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata, I'm glad Sen. Grassley at least hasn't forgotten them and what was a proximate cause of their deaths.

Senate Judiciary Committee Confirmation Hearings On Loretta Lynch

Loretta Lynch, the US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, is President Obama's nominee to succeed the despicable Eric Holder as Attorney General. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold hearings on her nomination starting tomorrow at 10am. The committee is now headed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA).

The committee has released its witness list. Looking it over there are some very interesting names on the list such as Sharyl Attkisson, Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote, and Sheriff David Clarke of Milwaukee. You have to wonder if they will discuss Operation Fast and Furious, the hacking of Attkisson's computer, the targeting of conservative non-profits by the Obama Administration, the vilification of law enforcement by Holder, and other such topics. I would also note that Professors Rosenkranz and Turley both are affiliated with the libertarian Cato Institute.

The full list is below:

Witnesses

Panel I

Loretta Lynch
U.S. Attorney For The Eastern District Of New York
U.S. Department of Justice
Brooklyn , NY

Panel II

Sharyl Attkisson
Investigative Journalist

David Barlow
Partner
Sidley Austin LLP

David A. Clarke, Jr.
Sheriff
Milwaukee County, Wisconsin

Catherine Engelbrecht
Founder
True The Vote

Janice K. Fedarcyk
Fedarcyk Consulting LLC

Stephen H. Legomsky
John S. Lehmann University Professor
School of Law at Washington University

The Reverend Doctor Clarence Newsome
Cincinnati , OH

Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz
Professor Of Law, Georgetown University Law Center
Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies Cato Institute

Johnathan Turley
Professor, J.B. And Maurice C. Shapiro Chair Of Public Interest Law
Georgetown Law School Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies Cato Institute
Washington , DC

Dick Durbin's Dog And Pony Show On Stand Your Ground

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights, finally held his delayed hearing on so-called Stand Your Ground laws. The hearing entitled, "'Stand Your Ground' Laws: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force", was originally scheduled to be held on September 17th.

The witness list changed somewhat from the earlier scheduled hearing. It added three US Representatives as witnesses in one panel and substituted the president of a prosecutor's association for a Florida state's attorney. The list is below:

Panel I

The Honorable Marcia L. Fudge
United States Representative (D-OH-11)
Washington, DC

The Honorable Luis V. Gutierrez
United States Representative (D-IL-4)
Washington, DC

The Honorable Louie Gohmert
United States Representative (R-TX-1)
Washington, DC

Panel II

Sybrina Fulton
Miami, FL

David LaBahn
President and CEO
Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
Washington, DC

Lucia McBath
Atlanta, GA

Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr.
Clinical Professor of Law, Director of the Criminal Justice Institute
Harvard Law School
Cambridge, MA

John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D.
President
Crime Prevention Research Center
Swarthmore, PA

Ilya Shapiro
Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies
Cato Institute
Washington, DC

The webcast of the 2 hour hearing can be seen here.

Fortunately, you don't have to wade through all 2 hours of testimony to get the gist of what was said. Attorney Andrew Branca, author of The Law of Self Defense, 2nd Ed. has done it for us over at the Legal Insurrection blog. In addition to summarizing the testimony of each witness as well as that of the senators on the panel, he gives his take on the whole charade.

My first general observation is that the anti-SYG folks were, as experience would suggest, big on emotion and small on actual facts, law, or data.

One of the anti-SYG witnesses, Professor Sullivan from Harvard Law School, did raise some actual data–but when these were utterly destroyed by the later testimony of Dr. John Lott and Elliot Shapiro of CATA (sic), Professor Sullivan was swift to discount the use of data (which he himself had introduced into the testimony) and instead focus on the “real people” behind the data. In sharp contrast, the testimony of the pro-SYG speakers was focused and direct.

Second, the anti-SYG folks persistently conflated the legal concept of Stand Your Ground with utterly discrete legal concepts, such as presumptions of reasonableness and civil/criminal immunity.

When this is done by people without legal training or experience, such as Sabrina Fulton, one can of course accept it as an unknowing error. When it is persistently done by a Harvard Law Professor and a head of an (allegedly) leading association of State Prosecutors, one can only wonder at either their actual intent or their underlying intelligence.

Indeed, their misstatements of the law were so egregious that at one point Dr. Lott was obliged to read aloud from the actual Florida statute they had badly mischaracterized, to which they naturally had no substantive response. In that case they were claiming that even criminal aggressors could claim Stand Your Ground privilege under Florida law, a claim that the plain language of the statute read by Dr. Lott clearly destroys.

In any case, it is clear that their effort is intended to be a broad attack on all three fronts — likely with immunity being the true target, as it represents the largest pot of gold for their supporters — rather than any focused concern on Stand Your Ground, per se.

Finally, the bottom line is I expect this hearing, and any similar subsequent efforts, to be little more than political theater, with no substantive changes resulting to the law of self-defense.

I certainly hope Mr. Branca is correct that there will be no substantive changes and that this is nothing more than political theater. One explanation that I've heard for these hearings is that they are an effort by Sen. Durbin to keep alive a polarizing issue so as to promote higher turnout by African-Americans in the 2014 mid-term elections. Given that Durbin has shown time and again that he is a shameless opportunist, I wouldn't put this past him.

UPDATE: Kurt Hofmann, the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner, gives his take on Durbin and these hearings. I agree with Kurt that having Durbin chair any committee with the word "Constitution" in its name is "a grim joke."

Durbin's "Stand Your Ground" Hearings

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights. As mentioned before, he plans to hold a hearing on so-called Stand Your Ground laws. He has entitled his hearings, "‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws: Civil Rights and Public Safety Implications of the Expanded Use of Deadly Force". This hearing is scheduled for tomorrow at 10am.

The witness list for the hearing has been published.

Sybrina Fulton
Miami, FL

Lucia McBath
Atlanta, GA

William N. Meggs
State Attorney
Second Judicial Circuit
Tallahassee, FL

Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr.
Clinical Professor of Law, Director of the Criminal Justice Institute
Harvard Law School
Cambridge, MA

John R. Lott, Jr., Ph.D.
President
Crime Prevention Research Center
Swarthmore, PA

Ilya Shapiro
Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies
Cato Institute
Washington, DC

Sybrina Fulton really needs no introduction as she got more than her 15 minutes of fame during the George Zimmerman trial.

Lucia McBath was the mother of Jordan Davis who was killed in a confrontation in Jacksonville, FL by Martin Dunn. Mr. Dunn is charged with 1st Degree Murder in the case. Ms. McBath is concerned that Dunn will try to claim self-defense under Florida's "stand your ground" law.

Willie Meggs is the State Attorney (or DA) for the 2nd Judicial Circuit which includes the Tallahassee area of Florida. He is a well-known opponent of the Florida "Stand Your Ground" law and has called it "the dumbest law ever put on the books."

Ronald Sullivan is a Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. About the only thing I could find about regarding either Trayvon Martin or "Stand Your Ground" laws is that he spoke to a pro-Martin demonstration held by the Black Law Students Association at Harvard. He will also be a speaker on a panel  discussing "Guns, Violence, and Children" at the American Association of Law Schools conference in January 2014.

John Lott, of course, needs little introduction as he is one of the leading pro-gun researchers.

Ilya Shapiro is a Fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute. The Cato Institute has made Durbin's enemies list. In an article posted in August, Shapiro practically demanded Durbin include him in the list of speakers at this hearing.

This is unacceptable. Senator Durbin, care to invite me to testify at your little hearing? I rather enjoyed discussing Citizens United at the kabuki theatre you ran last year—though you seemed more interested in accusing me of being a pawn of the Koch brothers (with whom I have no beef, but who were actually suing Cato at the time)—and would be happy to have another tete-a-tete with my fellow University of Chicago Law School alum.

What will make this joke of a hearing even more interesting is that the Ranking Member for the Republican side is Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). While Durbin will rail on about the Koch Brothers, ALEC, and conservatives, I expect Cruz will be up to the challenge.

So Durbin Wants Hearings On Stand Your Ground

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) announced on Friday that he plans to hold hearings on Stand Your Ground laws in the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on The Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights of which he is the Chair.

In a statement, Durbin said the Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee on Constitution, civil rights and human rights ”will examine the gun lobby’s and the American Legislative Exchange Council’s influence in creating and promoting these laws; the way in which the laws have changed the legal definition of self-defense; the extent to which the laws have encouraged unnecessary shooting confrontations; and the civil rights implications when racial profiling and ‘stand your ground’ laws mix, along with other issues.”

Normally, I'd be dreading the nonsense that would come out of such a hearing. While this still could be true, the composition of the subcommittee gives me some hope.

The Ranking Member of the subcommittee is Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) who is a fierce proponent of the Second Amendment and gun rights. The Republican members also include Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Orrin Hatch (R-U). While Graham and Hatch have been wishy-washy on many things, they have been solid on gun rights.

The subcommittee's Democrats consist of Durbin, Al Franken (D-MN), Richard Bluementhal (D-CT), Chris Coons (D-DE),and Mazie Hirono (D-HI). Blumenthal is a hard-core anti gunner while the rest are reliably anti-gun.

Ted Cruz, while a mere freshman, has shown no hesitation in taking it to the anti's. He took Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) on in full Judiciary Committee over her AWB and made her look petty. I think he can do the same to those who would seek to diminish the laws of self-defense.

Senate Judiciary Hearing On B. Todd Jones (Updated)

The Senate Judiciary Committee takes up the nomination of B. Todd Jones to be the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives next Tuesday, June 4th, at 10am - it has been rescheduled to June 11th at 9:30am. Jones is currently the Acting Director as well as the US Attorney for the District of Minnesota. Interestingly, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) will be presiding over this nomination hearing instead of Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT).

Given the Obama Administration's efforts to punish whistle blowers as well as intimidate the press, Mr. Jones' roll in this should be examined. Last July, Jones issued a video to all ATF employees under his "Changecast" set of videos. Changecast No. 8 was entitled Choices and Consequences. While Jones tried to portray this as a warning not to do stupid stuff, most in the field took it as a warning not to follow the path of whistle blowers like Senior Agent John Dodson. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) saw it this way as well and pressed him on this. I don't know if he ever bothered to answer their letter.

Even if Jones sticks with his denial that it was meant as a warning to whistle blowers, it most certainly has had that impact. A case in point is the CleanUpATF.org website. Many who have followed this blog for a while know that it is a website run by and for dissident ATF agents who were fed up with the cronyism, stupidity, and malfeasance of the ATF leadership.

For the most part, this website has gone quiet since the beginning of the year. The Grapevine thread which used to be very active has had no posts since March. The Fast and Furious page has had nothing except a cartoon since February, The ATF-EEO violations thread has had nothing since January.

I'm sure veiled and not so veiled threats have been made to ATF Special Agents that they are to keep their mouths shut if they want to keep their badge. I do realize that correlation isn't causation but I don't think CUATF going quiet is just happenstance. While I do think ATF needs a permanent director, I don't think B. Todd Jones is the person for the job.

UPDATE: The webmaster at CUATF posted the following on June 4th regarding the nomination of B. Todd Jones and their adamant opposition to it. I think they make a good case as to why B. Todd does not deserve to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

The Senate Judiciary Committee will soon hold hearings regarding B. Todd Jones, Barrack Obama’s nominee to become the next Director of ATF. By any rational measure, Jones has been a pathetic disgrace and utter failure as ATF's Acting Director. He represents exactly what is wrong with the Bureau; a profound lack of integrity, transparency and competence, shameless cronyism, vicious protection of the ATF management "good `ol boy club", and institutionalized corruption. His confirmation as Director will only ensure that what was once one of the world's greatest law enforcement agencies will contine to decline and fail in its primary mission. If anything, Jones should be summarily fired, if not prosecuted for his breathtaking malfeasance as Acting Director.

While it is certainly true that ATF desperately needs a permanent Director, can't we do better than this? In a nation of over 300 million people, can't we find someone who actually has the basic integrity, commitment to justice, and elemental competence to finally put an end to the embarrassing plague of disgusting corruption and managerial stupidity that has paralyzed the Bureau for far too many years?

As Acting Director of ATF, B. Todd Jones has:

• Played a starring role in ATF's criminal obstruction of justice and outrageous stonewalling of Congress in a wide variety of matters, but particularly with regard to the "Fast & Furious" debacle.
• Engaged in flagrant relatiatory conduct against legitimate Whistleblowers. He is currently the subject of several federal investigations for this illegal conduct.
• Presided over one of if not the lowest government-wide employee approval ratings ever recorded since such surveys have been conducted.
• Repeatedly protected, promoted or otherwise rewarded profoundly incompetent and corrupt managers, including the SAC/DAD of Milwaukee, who was directly responsible for ignominously failed operations. Jones personally ensured that this beacon of performance was quietly transferred to where he had been begging to go for years.
• Allowed the ATF Reno office to be closed due solely to grotesquely incompetent local leadership, with zero adverse consequences for the guilty managers.
• Personally approved or at least looked the other way regarding the blatantly illegal arrangement" under which William McMahon, one of the primary perpetrators in the horrendous "Fast & Furious" scandal, was allowed to "double-dip" (collect a "no-show" ATF paycheck while actually working elsewhere) in flagrant violation of federal law and ATF policy. This was most likely done to buy McMahon's silence and protect both the Obama Administration and ATF from rightful scrutiny.
• Personally assisted the notoriously lawless, abusive and shockingly corrupt Chief Counsel's office to unlawfully attack, smear, relaiate against and personally destroy legitimate Whistleblower and EEOC complainants, while aggressively protecting the litany of corrupt managers who necessitated the complaints.
• Promoted one of the most viciously corrupt, dishonest and incompetent managers in the history of ATF (and that is really saying something) to head the Bureau's Internal Affairs Division.
• Has repeatedly rewarded unethical or demonstrably incompetent Assistant Directors that have miserably failed in their HQ duties by giving them paid moves back to cushy SAC positions of their choice.
• Engaged in numerous additional actions to cover ATF management's asses at all costs, regardless of trivial considerations such as truth, justice, law, policy or the disasterous consequences that all of this corruption has wrought on the agency and its ability to protect the American public.

The U.S. Congressional Committee on Government Oversight and Reform assesses B. Todd Jones' tenure as Acting ATF Director as follows:

• Failure to hold all the ATF personnel responsible for Operation Fast and Furious accountable – Nearly two years have gone by since the congressional investigation began. Still, several key individuals identified by both Congress and the Inspector General as having played prominent roles in using reckless tactics remain with the agency.
• Failure to support Fast and Furious whistleblowers – The Congressional investigation, the independent Department of Justice Inspector General, and an internal ATF review during Jones’ tenure exonerated the Fast and Furious whistleblowers. Yet, Jones has never commended or publicly defended these agents who brought the wrongdoing in Operation Fast and Furious to light. These whistleblowers faced retaliation from both inside and outside the Department of Justice, but Jones has steadfastly declined to recognize their heroic efforts to stop ATF gunwalking.
• Perceived hostility to ATF whistleblowers – In a video sent agency wide, Jones instructed ATF employees not to complain about problems outside their chain of command. ATF released the video as Fast and Furious remained prominently in the news. Agents within ATF were concerned enough to contact Congress about what they perceived to be a veiled threat and indirect criticism of Fast and Furious whistleblowers who spoke to Congress and reporters about gunwalking after complaints to ATF officials had fallen on deaf ears.
• Affording special treatment to ATF supervisor cited for negligence in Fast and Furious – In a particularly outrageous series of events, one of the key players in Operation Fast and Furious accepted a lucrative job at J. P. Morgan while still on ATF’s payroll. While the agency had no obligation to do so, the supervisor was given a special waiver under Jones’ tenure as Acting Director to remain employed by ATF while he simultaneously worked for J.P. Morgan. This was apparently done so that the agent could gain seniority for his government pension.
• An unwillingness to engage Congress – Jones has refused to discuss his actions and problems within his agency related to Operation Fast and Furious with congressional investigators. This position stands in stark contrast to his predecessor, former Acting ATF Director Ken Melson, who proactively sought an opportunity to tell investigators his understanding of what had gone wrong in Operation Fast and Furious and with the Justice Department’s flawed response to whistleblower allegations.
• Failure to apply lessons ATF has learned from Fast and Furious – Jones has, to date, exhibited a general failure to articulate to Congress, ATF agents, and the public his understanding of what went wrong, who is responsible, and what ATF needs to do in the future to be successful in its mission of enforcing firearms laws. He has not offered plans for reforming or restructuring the failed supervisory framework that allowed reckless tactics to continue for over a year and contributed to the death of a Border Patrol agent and numerous Mexican citizens.

Please contact your Congressmen and Senators immediately and urge them to just say "Hell No!" to B. Todd Jones.

"Jumped-Up Refugee From A Zoning Board"

The title of this post comes from a description of Sen. Dianne Feinsten (D-CA) made by Tam in a post back in February. I loved it then and I especially love it now that DiFi is all butt hurt over the eloquent thrashing she took from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) in the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday.

Ted Cruz asked DiFi whether she thought Congress could likewise limit the right of the people under the 1st and 4th Amendments as she is seeking to do with her Assault Weapons Ban of 2012. As you can see in the video below, DiFi gets all huffy about it. Three male Democrats also have to jump in because it seems that they are worried that a woman can't make a strong enough argument or so it would seem.





After the committee business meeting, DiFi had to run to CNN's Wolf Blitzer to wrap the mantle of victimhood across her shoulders. She said, "Well, I just felt patronized. I felt he was somewhat arrogant about it." CNN is still playing the clip below of DiFi whining about her treatment as I saw just this morning on TV in a local McDonalds.





Did DiFin really say she put her fingers in the wounds of George Moscone and Harvey Milk? Hmnm. I wonder when DiFi will get around to telling people that fellow Supervisor Dan White didn't use an AR or an AK or even an FN-FAL to murder them. No, Dan White used a S&W Model 10 in .38 Special - a plain old everyday revolver then used by police forces around the country.

20 years in the Senate and 9 years as the accidental mayor of San Francisco still doesn't make one a expert on Constitutional matters. Nor does it seem to engender any real respect for it either. She is, and will always remain, what Tam described her as - a meddling harpy and a jumped-up refugee from a zoning board.

Feinstein Gets Her Way

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) got her assault weapons ban (sic) - S. 150 - out of the Senate Judiciary Committee today on a 10-8 party line vote. It now goes to the full Senate.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) offered four amendments to the bill which were all defeated on an 8-10 party line vote. His amendments would have made exceptions for those in rural areas; for those who had obtained a protective order; for those who certified they were the victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, or stalking; and for those people who were residents in a county or municipality that borders Mexico to protect themselves against the narco-terrorists. I think Cornyn's intention was to put the Democrats on record as anti-rural, anti-woman, and anti-self defense.

The votes on Jane Kelly to be an Appeals Court judge in the 8th Circuit and on Kenneth Gonzales to be a District Court judge in New Mexico were held over.

 The results of the business meeting as reported are below:

Results of Executive Business Meeting - March 14, 2013
The Senate Judiciary Committee held an executive business meeting to consider pending nominations and legislation on March 14, 2013.

Agenda

I. Nominations

Jane Kelly, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit
Held Over

Kenneth John Gonzales, to be United States District Judge for the District of New Mexico
Held Over

II. Legislation

S. 150, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (Feinstein)
Ordered Reported by Roll Call Vote, 10-8

Amendment ALB13181 (Cornyn)
Failed by Roll Call Vote, 8-10

Amendment OLL13116 (Cornyn)
Failed by Roll Call Vote, 8-10

Amendment OLL13117 (Cornyn)
Failed by Roll Call Vote, 8-10

Amendment OLL13118 (Cornyn)
Failed by Roll Call Vote, 8-10

The webcast of the meeting for anyone with the stomach enough to watch it is here.

UPDATE: According to Politico, the White House is urging swift action on Feinstein's Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. Press Secretary Jay Carney had this to say:

"Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary committee voted to send the full Senate an important piece of legislation to help keep weapons of war off America’s streets," Carney said Thursday. "As you know, banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines is an important piece of the president's plan to reduce gun violence.

"We urge congress to swiftly vote on and pass this legislation and other common-sense measures like requiring a background check for all gun purchases and cracking down on gun trafficking and straw purchasers. There's been significant progress this week on these proposals and the president welcomes that. We urge congress to keep it up."

Frankly every time I hear the words "common sense" out of Jay Carney or President Obama's mouth, I shudder at the perversion of the English language.

Results Of Today's Senate Judiciary Committee Meeting

As I said earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee was going to resume meeting to discuss three gun related bills and the nomination of Kenneth Gonzales. They have released the results of the meeting and I have posted it below. Gonzales' nomination was not acted upon nor was Dianne Feinstein's S. 150. However, both Sen. Chuck Schumer's S. 374 and Sen. Barbara Boxer's S. 146 were reported out of committee with amendments.

Results of Executive Business Meeting - March 12, 2013 The Senate Judiciary Committee held a continuation of an executive business meeting to consider pending legislation on March 12, 2013. The Committee was not able to complete action on all pending matters and the meeting recessed subject to the call of the Chair.

Agenda
I. Legislation

S. 374, Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013
Ordered Reported by Roll Call Vote, 10-8

Amendment ALB13180 (Schumer)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

S. 146, School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013
Ordered Reported by Roll Call Vote 14-4

Amendment OLL13111 (Leahy)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

Amendment OLL13112 (Grassley)
Withdrawn

 Last week I wrote that I found it strange that Sen. Chuck Schumer's S. 374 - Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 - did not have an action component. It merely consisted of findings which were more suited to a Senate Resolution than to actual legislation.

That was then and this is now. The amendment that Schumer made today in committee to S. 374 contains the meat of the bill and it isn't pretty. Not only does it have universal background checks but it contains a provision that requires gun owners to report stolen weapons within 24 hours to authorities. The bill has also been renamed to the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013. There is more to the bill and I will have a separate post up about it after I finishing reading the whole thing.

Here is the link to my separate post on the bill.

Senate Judiciary Committee Meets Again

Last Tuesday the Senate Judiciary Committee met to vote on nominees for various judgeships and on a whole host of gun control bills. They ran out of time and only passed out S. 54 which is Sen. Leahy's bill on "gun trafficking".

Today they will continue this meeting. US Attorney for New Mexico Kenneth Gonzales will be back on the agenda as the nominee for a District Court judgeship for the District of New Mexico. Also on the agenda are the three gun control bills that they didn't vote on last week.

As an aside, Chuck Schumer's S. 374 - Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 - still doesn't have an action component to the bill. It still reads more like a resolution than a bill.

CONTINUATION

A continuation of the March 7, 2013 Executive Business Meeting has been scheduled by the Committee on the Judiciary for Tuesday, March 12, 2013 at 10:15 a.m., in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

By order of the Chairman.

AGENDA

Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 226
March 7, 2013 at 10:00 a.m.

I. Nominations

Kenneth John Gonzales, to be United States District Judge for the District of New Mexico

II. Bills

S.150, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (Feinstein)

S.374, Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 (Schumer)

S.146, School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013 (Boxer)

The Judiciary Committee is also scheduled to meet on Thursday, March 14th, on a similar agenda.

Mixed Results From Today's Judiciary Committee Meeting

There is both good news and bad news from today's Senate Judiciary Committee business meeting. The meeting agenda had votes on six nominees for US District Court judgeships and four gun control bills.

First, five out of the six the judicial nominees were passed out of committee on voice votes. However, Kenneth John Gonzales, the US Attorney for New Mexico and a nominee for a District Court judgeship, was held over. This would appear to mean that according to Committee Rules at least one member of the Judiciary Committee requested that the vote on Gonzales be held over until the next committee meeting. As I mentioned yesterday, Gonzales and his office have been pursuing a vendetta against the Reese family of Deming, New Mexico. Check out the Tea Party of Luna County for complete info on the prosecution of the Reeses.

Second, three of the four gun control bills were held over. The bad news is that Chairman Patrick Leahy's S. 54 - Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 made it out of the committee. It passed on a 11 to 7 vote. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) was the only Republican to vote for the bill.

Grassley did have an amendment to the bill that would require the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division to personally review and approve any "Fast and Furious" type of operation. This amendment was adopted unanimously.

The full results of the business meeting with links to the amendments is below:

The Senate Judiciary Committee held an executive business meeting to consider pending nominations and legislation on March 7, 2013. The Committee was not able to complete action on pending matters and the meeting recessed subject to the call of the Chair.

Agenda

I. Nominations

Sheri Polster Chappell, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida
Ordered Reported by Voice Vote

Kenneth John Gonzales, to be United States District Judge for the District of New Mexico
Held Over

Michael J. McShane, to be United States District Judge for the District of Oregon
Ordered Reported by Voice Vote

Nitza I. Quinones Alejandro, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Ordered Reported by Voice Vote

Luis Felipe Restrepo, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Ordered Reported by Voice Vote

Jeffrey L. Schmehl, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Ordered Reported by Voice Vote

II. Legislation

S.150, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (Feinstein)
Held Over

Amendment ALB13141(Grassley)
As Amended, Adopted by Voice Vote

Second Degree Amendment ALB13196 (Coons)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

Amendment ALB13190 (Grassley)
Failed by Roll Call Vote, 9-9

Amendment OLL13115 (Cornyn)
Failed by Roll Call Vote, 9-9

S.54, Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 (Leahy)
Ordered Reported by Roll Call Vote, 11-7

Substitute Amendment HEN13250 (Leahy)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

Amendment ALB13193 (Grassley)
Adopted by Unanimous Consent

S.374, Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 (Schumer)
Held Over

S.146, School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013 (Boxer)
Held Over

GOA On The Senate Judiciary Bill Mark-Ups

The Gun Owners of America have sent out a notice about the bills that will be voted on in the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow. While they mention S. 443, I'm wondering if this bill will be substituted for the S. 54 which is on the agenda. I don't always agree with GOA but I think are correct about S. 443 being more dangerous than S. 150 which doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being enacted.

Senate “Deal” Would Impose Even More Gun Bans
Gifts, gun raffles and multiple sales of guns would be effectively banned

Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will mark up four bills arising out of the Newtown tragedy:

* The Feinstein bill — which would ban millions of shotguns, rifles, handguns and magazines that Americans can legally own -- but which will probably die on the Senate floor.

* The universal gun registry — which may also die on the Senate floor — unless a last-minute deal with Sen. Tom Coburn brings it to life.

* Legislation by Barbara Boxer, which throws away $100,000,000 on school safety studies, but doesn’t immediately mention guns.

* And, currently the biggest danger, the Leahy-Gillibrand-Kirk bill, which has ominously been labeled a “gun trafficking” bill.

In regard to this latter piece of legislation (S. 443), the bill is being sold inside the Beltway as a bipartisan “compromise” because anti-gun Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) is a cosponsor of it.

But S. 443 would dramatically threaten to put gun owners in jail with horrendously long sentences for the most minor of infractions.

Essentially, the bill would impose a 15-year prison sentence for “negligent multiple sales by a dealer,” “negligent gifting” or “negligent raffling.”

Increasingly, there are more and more individuals who are “prohibited persons” for non-violent reasons — for instance, they smoke marijuana or they are military veterans suffering from maladies such as PTSD.

But if S. 443 is passed, any person who sells to such prohibited persons two or more firearms ... or gives them a firearm as a gift ... or raffles a firearm (where they are the recipient) ... does so only at the considerable risk of spending 15 years in a federal penitentiary.

You don’t need to know the person is a prohibited person under either example. Nor does the recipient need to know they’re a prohibited person.

In fact, you don’t need to do anything more than plan (“conspire”) to transfer the gun. In addition, the recipient doesn’t need to be on the NICS list to be a prohibited person.

Not only that, under section 4 of the bill, if you even “intend” to sell a firearm to a person who turns out to be a marijuana smoker — or one of the prohibited military veterans suffering from PTSD — you become a prohibited person yourself.

Go here to read the entire analysis of S. 443.

When all is said and done, this bipartisan “compromise” is as bad as the Feinstein gun ban (S. 150).

ACTION: Click here to demand that your U.S. Senators oppose the Leahy-Gillibrand-Kirk bill (S. 443).

Senate Judiciary Committee Votes On Gun Control Tomorrow

The Senate Judiciary Committee will have an executive business meeting tomorrow morning at 10am. There are a number of items that should be of concern to those concerned with the Second Amendment and gun rights.

The first item on the agenda is a confirmation vote on six nominees for US District judgeships. Of particular concern is Kenneth John Gonzales to be a District Court judge for the District of New Mexico. Gonzales is currently the US Attorney for New Mexico and the man behind the egregious prosecution of the Reese family of Deming, NM on charges of arms smuggling. They have already been found not guilty on 24 out of 28 charges and are seeking dismissal of the other four charges due to prosecutorial misconduct.

National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea and the Firearms Coalition's Jeff Knox have been doing yeoman's work in covering this case since the beginning. Here are a couple of their latest reports. The Tea Party of Luna County (NM) has been on the case since the beginning as well.

Based on the prosecution's behavior under Gonzales, I and many others feel he is unfit to sit on the bench. David Codrea is urging that people contact Sen. Chuck Grassley R-IA) to make their opposition known.

The other major items on the Judiciary Committee's agenda are votes on four gun control measures.

II. Bills

S.150, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (Feinstein)

S.54, Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 (Leahy)

S.374, Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 (Schumer)

S.146, School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013 (Boxer)

Given the composition of the committee, I really have no expectation that they won't pass these measures. The only question is whether any Republican votes for any of these measures.  I would hope not but there is no guarantees. Sebastian has a good post up today about the risk of letting gun controllers have any victory. In my opinion, a party line vote is about the best we can expect in the Senate Judiciary Committee and would count as a win.

It's time to tell the Republicans on the committee that we expect them to hold the line. Contact info is available here.