ConfirmThem

By Quin Posted in Uncategorized — Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

The Senate Judiciary Committee this morning began not with the judicial nominations, but with the asbestos legislation. I don't know whether this means they will get to the nominations later today, or, instead, if it means yet ANOTHER delay for Bill Pryor, this time until after next week's recess.
But it's worth noting that Pryor isn't the only nomination originally scheduled for today. Another one, and one that all fair-minded people should support, is the nomination of top White House official Brett Kavanaugh to the DC Appeals Court. Kavanaugh is only 37 (or maybe 38 by now?), but his credentials -- law school, clerkships, etc -- are OUTSTANDING. The Dems have it out for him because he served in a fairly high position on Kenneth Starr's Independent Counsel staff. Not that that should be a disqualifier, but for the HillaryDems, it is. But here's why even THAT guilt by association shouldn't lead the Dems to oppose Kavanaugh: By all accounts, he was the most level-headed guy in the whole Starr outfit. I personally dealt with him for an hour or two -- with one of his superiors' permission for him to do so -- when I was writing a book review for the WSJ concerning aspects of the Clinton scandals. Brett walked me through aspects of the already-public parts of the investigation -- just helping me wade through it, because it was all so complex, but not divulging any privileged info -- and HERE'S THE RUB: The parts he walked me through, and the emphasis of his walk-through, tended more to EXONERATE the Clintonites than to condemn them. In other words, Brett was not in the political "gotcha" business, not trying to destroy the Clintons. He was just a lawyer trying to separate fact from fiction, and he gave evidence not merely of no bias against the Clintonites, but of an abundance of fair-mindedness instead. I relate this story only to put into context what ALREADY IS PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE that the Dems are ignoring. Namely, this: In the book by the liberals' hero Bob Woodward about the Starr investigation, Woodward himself portrays Brett as the guy always urging restraint on Starr. According to Woodward, Brett advised that the Starr report contain only facts and not recommendations. And Brett advised keeping the more explicit sexual stuff out of the report, or at least in a separate set of notes less likely to be released to the public. He did not think it necessary to embarrass the president of the United States by including so many prurient details. (Granted, Starr himself was not responsible for releasing the whole report to the public: That was Gingrich's hare-brained idea. But Starr's staff knew it was at least possible, even likely, that Gingrich would do so, and Kavanaugh, at the tender age of something like30, had the wisdom -- dare I say it, had the judiciousness -- to urge restraint and to urge that the president, and the presidency, not be unduly belittled by the inclusion of explicit sexual details unless absolutely necessary for the case.) How, then, can the Dems tar Brett Kavanaugh with the brush of Ken Starr, when Bob Woodward the Great paints Brett in such a flattering light? The fact is that Brett is an outstanding legal mind with sterling credentials and wisdom way beyond his years. He merits confirmation, forthwith.