Alito's honesty questioned. Looks like the Democrats have got some significant ammo.
The
New York Times will have this on Friday:
WASHINGTON -- Signaling their intent to put up a tough fight in next week's hearings on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr., Senate Democrats said Thursday that they will call at least two witnesses who could question his personal credibility as well several experts on civil rights and constitutional law.
More from NY Times (not online yet):
One witness is John G.S. Flym, a legal scholar. In 2002, Flym served as counsel to a plaintiff suing the mutual fund company Vanguard in a case that came before Alito on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Alito had pledged during his confirmation hearings for the appeals court in 1990 that he would recuse himself from cases involving the company, which managed his investments, and when a panel including Alito ruled unanimously in Vanguard's favor, Flym complained to the court.
Alito has attributed the lapse to an error in a courthouse computer system that screened for potential conflicts. Ethics guidelines did not require him to recuse himself, and he volunteered to do so during his confirmation hearings to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Come again???
He volunteered to recuse himself to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest, then broke his promise?
Well, I guess that is OK then.
The other witness expected to address Alito's character is Stephen R. Dujack, a journalist who has criticized a conservative alumni group to which Alito belonged. The group, Concerned Alumni of Princeton, opposed the university's admission of women, criticized its affirmative action policies and urged the admission of more alumni children. It went out of business around 1987.
...
In a meeting with reporters Thursday, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., also a member of the Judiciary Committee, called Concerned Alumni of Princeton "anti-black" and "anti-women," and questioned why Alito had failed to mention his membership in response to the Senate questionnaire for his confirmation to the federal appeals court.
What a guy. Keep the riffraff out!!! Just the guy we want on SCOTUS -- NOT.
No wonder the dems are delaying committee hearings for a week. Who knows what else they can dig up.