Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRuss Feingold: We Know Brett Kavanaugh Has Lied Already
OPINION
09/17/2018 08:38 pm
Taking all his testimony together, we see a clear pattern emerge: Brett Kavanaugh has never appeared under oath before the U.S. Senate without lying.
.......
In fact, theres clear evidence showing that Kavanaugh lied under oath during the 2006 confirmation hearing for his spot on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. I should know: I was one of the senators on the Judiciary Committee who questioned him.
I asked Kavanaugh about his involvement as White House staff secretary in the highly controversial 2001 nomination of Charles Pickering Sr. to the 5th Circuit. Many of us were concerned about a 1994 hate crimes case in which Pickering decided that a 25-year-old, who had participated with two others in a cross burning, was deserving of a reduced sentence.
During the Senates consideration of Pickerings nomination, we had also learned that the federal trial judge solicited and collected letters of support from lawyers who had appeared in his courtroom, some of whom had cases still pending before him. This was a clear breach of judicial ethics, so I asked Kavanaugh about it:
Sen. Russ Feingold: My first question is this. Did you know that Judge Pickering planned to solicit letters of support in this manner before he did so? And if not, when did you become aware that Judge Pickering had solicited these letters of support?
Brett Kavanaugh: The answer to the first question, Senator, is no. This was not one of the judicial nominees that I was primarily handling.
But newly released emails show that Kavanaugh appeared to be the primary person handling Pickerings nomination, at least by 2003, and was heavily involved in pushing for his confirmation as early as March 2002. There are emails showing that Kavanaugh coordinated meetings with and about Pickering; that he drafted remarks, letters to people on the Hill and at least one op-ed for then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales about Pickering; that he advised Gonzales on Pickering strategy; and much more.
One Department of Justice official even asked for Kavanaughs blessings and instructions before calling the nominee.
Others may have been involved, but Kavanaugh played a decisive leadership role in managing Pickerings nomination and then lied to me about it.
..............
MORE Kavanaugh Lying Here:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-russ-feingold-kavanaugh-lies_us_5ba020f6e4b013b0977defff?tep
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1403 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (39)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Russ Feingold: We Know Brett Kavanaugh Has Lied Already (Original Post)
kpete
Sep 2018
OP
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)1. THIS is what we need to be beating the drum on every day.
We know that being a sexual predator isn't a dealbreaker for the GOP, but lying under oath is something that the GOP can't defend as being "boys will be boys."
I agree with Feinstein on this.
blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)2. Isn't lying to congress a crime?
If so and they know he lied, why didn't they prosecute him?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)3. If they say, "I don't recall" or "To the best of my recollection" they can wiggle out of it
When a person is prosecuted, there are separate federal regulations for perjury specifically and lying to the feds generally. Under the United States Code, title 18, section 1001, a person who knowingly or willingly makes a material statement that is false, or fraudulent, to the feds, is guilty of a crime. What comes as a surprise to many is that unlike section 1621, section 1001 does not require that a person be under oath.
The difficulty that comes in prosecuting these crimes is the requirement that the statements be made knowingly or willingly. This allows those being accused of, or investigated for, perjury, to assert a lack of knowledge at the time of the statement that the statement was false. However, this may not be compelling enough to defeat or avoid a prosecution if contradictory evidence exists. Additionally, individuals who lie out of fear, or provide evasive answers, during a federal investigation, frequently find themselves facing the threat of federal prosecution.
The difficulty that comes in prosecuting these crimes is the requirement that the statements be made knowingly or willingly. This allows those being accused of, or investigated for, perjury, to assert a lack of knowledge at the time of the statement that the statement was false. However, this may not be compelling enough to defeat or avoid a prosecution if contradictory evidence exists. Additionally, individuals who lie out of fear, or provide evasive answers, during a federal investigation, frequently find themselves facing the threat of federal prosecution.
https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2017/03/what-are-the-penalties-for-lying-to-congress.html
Granted, Kavanaugh said "This was not one of the judicial nominees that I was primarily handling," and the emails indicate otherwise.