Democratic Senators are continuing their scorched earth obstruction strategy against Judge Brett Kavanaugh to serve on the Supreme Court.
U.S. Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) are among those opposing President Donald Trump’s nomination of Kavanaugh. The hearings are expected to start Tuesday.
Brown said he would vote against Kavanaugh because he believes the judge “would side with special interests over working people and threaten the rights of Ohioans,” The Plain Dealer reported.
“Special interests already have armies of lobbyists and lawyers on their side. Working people need justices who will put their rights first, not justices who will side with insurance companies over cancer survivors, financial scammers over customers, or massive corporations over American workers,” Brown said.
The senator is even asking Ohioans to sign an online petition joining him in his opposition.
Brown’s Senate race opponent, U.S. Representative Jim Renacci (R-OH-16), likely will not be signing the petition.
Renacci, told Cleveland 19 News, “Brett Kavanaugh is a thoughtful jurist with a proven respect for the Constitution and with extensive experience as a federal appeals judge. If Sherrod Brown ignores Kavanaugh’s highly regarded record and once again tries to block President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, it will be one more signal Brown cares more about representing the fringe left and his Hollywood donors than the people of Ohio. We deserve a Senator who reveres the Constitution more than they revere Chuck Schumer.”
Meanwhile, on Sunday, Minnesota’s Klobuchar previewed a new line of attack you might hear this week from Democrats trying to oppose Kavanaugh – “classified documents.”
Minnesota’s senior senator appeared on Meet the Press. The video is available here.
Klobuchar said, “148,000 documents that I’ve seen that you cannot see because they won’t allow us to make them public. So I can’t even tell you about them right now on the show.”
NBC’s Chuck Todd asked if the documents would make Kavanaugh unqualified.
Klobuchar said, “I think that you could ask some very interesting questions about these documents that I am unable to even say because I’m not able to make them public. And I don’t know what the result would be of a hearing. … It would certainly bolster the, strongly bolster the arguments that I could make.”
Democrats likely will beat the drum this week over the classified documents that the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee supposedly have refused to make public.
That is not true, however.
In mid-August, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, wrote to his Democrat colleagues with an offer to facilitate access to specific confidential records that Democrat members wish to discuss during the open session of the confirmation hearing. His letter is available to read here.
Klobuchar was the only Democratic senator to respond to Grassley’s request – and she asked for only 12 pages, to which Grassley agreed.
If these confidential documents are so disqualifying, then why didn’t Klobuchar and other Democrats request more of them be made public through the committee’s process? Especially after the chairman offered to help facilitate that type of request.
The answer should be obvious. There are no disqualifying documents. Democrats are more interested in grandstanding and create a reason to block the nomination when one does not exist.
Steve Gill, Star News Digital Media National political editor, said, “Have they personally read the hundreds of thousands of documents that Kavanaugh actually handled? We need to remember that those demanding these documents that were not created by Kavanaugh and that are being used to simply delay the hearings are the same folks who didn’t read the 500 page Obamacare bill before voting for it to ‘find out what was in it’.”
Grassley’s letter to his colleagues said, “During Justice Gorsuch’s confirmation, I worked closely with my Democratic colleagues to assist them in asking the Administration to waive the [Presidential Records Act] restrictions and [Freedom of Information Action Act] exemptions on a reasonable number of Committee Confidential documents that those colleagues intended to use at the confirmation hearing.
Records are designated as “committee confidential” if they contain material legally restricted from public release, Grassley said in a statement. This includes sensitive personal information, such as full names, dates of birth, social security numbers, and purely personal communications with family members, along with government information that federal law has deemed too sensitive for disclosure.