2fer, KAVANAUGH questioned SCotUS Watergate decision; &p.r.firm CRC backing him repped SwiftBOT Vets

[UTUSN]

************QUOTE**********

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kavanaugh-questioned-watergate-decision_us_5b53baa1e4b0de86f48dab44

Trump Supreme Court Nominee Kavanaugh Questioned Watergate Tapes Decision

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh suggested nearly two decades ago that the unanimous high court ruling in 1974 that forced President Richard Nixon to turn over the Watergate tapes may have been wrongly decided. ....

Kavanaugh’s belief in robust executive authority already is front and center in his nomination by President Donald Trump. The comments are among thousands of pages of documents that Kavanaugh has provided to lawmakers as part of the confirmation process.

Kavanaugh was taking part in a roundtable discussion when he made the remarks about the Watergate tapes case. A 1999 magazine article about the roundtable was among the material that Kavanaugh has provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee as part of the confirmation process. ....

Kavanaugh has written nearly 300 rulings as an appeals court judge and has a record in the George W. Bush White House and Kenneth Starr’s probe of Bill Clinton in the 1990s.

His response to the questionnaire runs 110 pages and comes with thick appendices.



https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-crc-public-relations_us_5b523c8ae4b0de86f48ce857

The Selling of Judge Brett Kavanaugh
Meet the shadowy PR firm working to confirm Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.

.... CRC Public Relations is a staple of the conservative public affairs ecosystem. The firm, originally called Creative Response Concepts, was founded in 1989 but first achieved prominence in 2004, when it coordinated the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign, a nationwide PR and advertising campaign to cast doubt on Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry’s war record.

Since then, CRC has been behind the curtain for nearly every conservative cause, including the National Organization for Marriage, the Family Research Council and the Republican Party itself. During the development of the Affordable Care Act, current Florida Gov. Rick Scott tapped CRC to help roll out ads describing the horrors of socialized medicine in Canada and the United Kingdom. In 2009, as America debated the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, CRC reportedly sent more than 60 emails to a Washington Post reporter offering editorials, quotes describing the justice as an extremist and “a Web posting accusing Obama of race-baiting in selecting her.”

Though few are publicized on its website, CRC’s links to the conservative movement are numerous. Its current president, Greg Mueller, was communications director for conservative Pat Buchanan during his 1992 and 1996 Republican presidential campaigns. Eugene B. Meyer, the president of The Federalist Society, a conservative legal group that developed a list of judicial nominees for Trump, told The New York Times in 2005 that he received media training from CRC. Last year, Republican strategist and Trump spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway sold her polling company to the firm.

CRC’s role in the campaign to confirm Kavanaugh, too, appears to go beyond pitch emails. The Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative legal organization that reportedly spent $10 million on the campaign to confirm Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch last year, has already announced $3.8 million in spending to air pro-Kavanaugh ads in Alabama, Indiana, North Dakota and West Virginia — states where senators could be wavering on their confirmation vote. According to the group’s most recent tax filing, the Judicial Crisis Network paid CRC $1.4 million for public relations from July 2015 through June 2016. The “about” page of the Judicial Crisis Network’s website directs queries to CRC. ....

The campaign around Kavanaugh, for example, meticulously stresses his qualifications, his impartiality and, especially, his support of women. Eighteen of his female former clerks signed an open letter stating that he “has been one of the strongest advocates in the federal judiciary for women lawyers.” These messages are specifically targeted at wavering Republican and Democratic senators and meant to convey the idea that he would not overturn Roe v. Wade. ....

******UNQUOTE*********

[asiliveandbreathe]

1. A fine example of just what the Senate needs to consider in this abomination of a

nomination....to think that women writing or signing a nod for kavanaugh to buy women votes is one narrative...that I am not buying....Kavanaughs writings precede him.....


https://www.justsecurity.org/59356/setting-record-straight-brett-kavanaughs-views-criminal-investigation-president/

Recusal question does not just arise in the normal course, as it might (and has) for many new Justices.

Rule-of-law controversies have virtually defined this Administration as the president demands “loyalty” from senior law enforcement officials, insists on immunity from obstruction of justice charges, and boasts of the “absolute” power to pardon anyone for any reason, including himself.

He has aggressively staked out these positions, with full support from his legal team, in the context of an unprecedented investigation into a foreign power’s intervention on his behalf in the last election.

It is in these extraordinary circumstances that the Senate will examine Judge Kavanaugh’s well-developed and strong views on the criminal prosecution of presidents, which are consistent with (if considerably more sophisticated than) those of the president under investigation who has nominated him.

The issue of those views and whether they compel recusal will require thorough exploration.

The Supreme Court has declined to adopt formal recusal rules and leaves the choice entirely to the discretion of individual Justices, who are also not obligated to explain the reasons.


In another posting, we will consider the specific questions that may be put to the nominee and the issues raised by the answers that Judge Kavanaugh might give—or decline to provide. From Just Security

[world wide wally]

2. Question:

If the Costitution provides a means for impeachment of the President, how can this guy oppose it and keep insisting he is a strict "Constitutionalist"?

[UTUSN]

3. He don't have to answer our steenkin' questions!1 & whatever "answers" he gives, we gotta stuff!1

[Gothmog]

4. K&R

[Rhiannon12866]

5. Of course he did...