Let’s sidestep for a sec Senators dismissing the weight of Blasey Ford’s testimony of assault. There’s another instance, of a mistruth, in BLACK and WHITE, made by Brett Kavanaugh, a court officer — and in his oral testimony. Memos released last month, that were stolen by a former committee staffer and sent to Kavanaugh in 2002-03, got posted. Leahy put them on twitter, not hard to find. When asked about these, see what Kavanaugh answered, below.
From the 2004 confirmation hearing, for D.C. circuit judge:
Schumer: I just want to clear up the questions that Orrin asked. You had said that Mr. Miranda never provided these documents, you know, that were from this.
Kavanaugh: Right.
Schumer: Had you seen them in any way? Did you ever come across memos from internal files of any Democratic members given to you or provided to you in any way?
Kavanaugh: No.
From his 2006 confirmation hearing:
Senator Durbin. Did you ever work with him in terms of judicial nominations?
Mr. Kavanaugh. …. We talked about this last time. I did not know about any memos from the Democratic side. I did not suspect that. Had I known or suspected that, I would have immediately told Judge Gonzales, who I'm sure would have immediately talked to Chairman Hatch about it. Did not know about it, did not suspect it. He was part, however, of the staff, of course, that worked on judicial nominations, including with--on both sides.
Finally, the NYC Bar Association (not the ABA), who had rated Neil Gorsuch a year ago as “Qualified” for SCOTUS, this year declined to give Kavanaugh a rating, because of 1 of 8 factors it could not weigh in on approvingly: “integrity and independence”.
This statement by the NYC Bar was on Sept 18, before the Kavanaugh-Blasey dispute.
….Specifically, between 2001 and 2003, Republican Senate Judiciary Committee staffers appear to have improperly accessed and distributed computer files of Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee relating to judicial nominations. It appears that documents recently released to the Senate Judiciary Committee show that those improperly obtained materials were shared with the nominee in 2002 and 2003, who, at that time, played an important role in advancing President Bush’s judicial nominations.
In the 2004 Senate hearings, Senators Orrin Hatch and Charles Schumer asked the nominee whether Republican staffers had ever shared, referenced, or provided him with any documents that appeared to have been drafted by Democratic staffers of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The nominee responded that he had not become aware of the matter until it had been disclosed in the media in late 2003. The nominee answered “no” when asked whether he had ever come across memos from the internal files of Democrats.
In the 2006 Senate hearings, Judge Kavanaugh was asked whether he had any indication that materials he had seen might have been stolen. He responded that he never saw the materials.
During the recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing held during the week of September 3, 2018, it came to light – through the limited disclosure of email communications released by the White House – that, contrary to Judge Kavanaugh’s 2004 and 2006 testimony, he had received Democratic materials in 2002 and 2003 dealing with judicial nominations. When asked whether he had been provided information about what Democratic senators were planning to ask judicial nominees, Judge Kavanaugh did not directly answer whether he had received the materials, responding instead that it was very common to discuss what questions were likely to arise during judicial nominee hearings. Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony appears to reflect a shift: in 2004 and 2006, he denied that he had ever seen the improperly obtained materials; in 2018, he denied knowing that materials he’d admittedly received had been improperly obtained. These recently released emails raise a substantial question about whether Judge Kavanaugh has testified truthfully.
If an officer of the court does not need to testify truthfully, then why does anyone facing the justice system of the US need to bear witness truthfully?
Does it degrade the court system? (It’s not really a Democratic or Republican thing; the answer should not come down to political party.)