Article

2010-05-24 Home Front: Politix

GOP senator says Democrats' push for quick Kagan hearings could cause a 'train wreck'

Whaddaya know. Looks like Sen. Sessions is a lurker here. :-)
The top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee warned Monday that he would seek to slow Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan's path to confirmation unless senators get full access to her files as a Clinton administration aide.

"We're heading to what could be a train wreck," Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama said. "I don't believe that this committee can go forward with an adequate hearing" without all records from Kagan's tenure as a White House counsel and then domestic policy adviser to President Bill Clinton.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the Judiciary Committee chairman, last week set hearings to begin on June 28. Sessions said Republicans would ask for a delay unless senators get access to the tens of thousands of pages of Clinton-era records by then.
We gotta have her confirmed NOW! It can't wait a couple months! It's impossible! So what if the repercussions of this decision is something that can last fop another 30+ years?! We can't find anyone else with a brain who can read to help rifle through the Clinton Library records! We can't find a couple more lawyers to help review this stuff! We can't find the budget for it! We already scheduled it! Oh no, can't change it! Got school plays to go to all the other days! And if we have something to hide, well, that's just a coincidence.

Posted by gorb 2010-05-24 16:39|| || Front Page|| [11137 views ] Top

#1 Sorry, I could have sworn I put it under Non-WoT.

Posted by gorb 2010-05-24 16:50|| 2010-05-24 16:50|| Front Page Top

#2 What's the issue with the papers? Did Kagan and the Hildebeast try to lick some of the same problems while they were in the White House?

Posted by Besoeker 2010-05-24 17:00|| 2010-05-24 17:00|| Front Page Top

#3 Seedy pols, my friend Gorb, seedy pols ...

Posted by Steve White 2010-05-24 17:18|| 2010-05-24 17:18|| Front Page Top

#4 When in session, the Supreme Court normally hears two weeks worth of argument then takes two weeks off with an extended break at the Holiday season. Thus, you will have an early October docket, an early November docket, an early December docket, a late January/early February docket, a late February/early March Docket, a late March/early April docket, and a late April/early May docket. Arguments are typically heard on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday with 2-3 cases per day. - from a simple Google of "Supreme Court session"

So, all the cases for 2009-10 are already worked. That means she doesn't have to take her seat to hear cases till the first week in October. What's the rush? /rhet question

Posted by Procopius2k 2010-05-24 17:47|| 2010-05-24 17:47|| Front Page Top

#5 This one's a 'Red Herring' (sort of a Harriet Miers in disguise) I believe.

Not TheOne®'s first choice, but useful as a 'system test'.

Posted by Mullah Richard 2010-05-24 18:52|| 2010-05-24 18:52|| Front Page Top

#6 Seedy pols, my friend Gorb, seedy pols ...

Isn't that redundant?

Posted by gorb 2010-05-24 22:48|| 2010-05-24 22:48|| Front Page Top

21:10 newc
20:17 SteveS
18:44 magpie
18:33 Frank G
18:33 badanov
18:26 Hellfish
18:23 Hellfish
17:40 swksvolFF
17:34 Ebbuger Whuque4103
17:30 Ebbuger Whuque4103
17:02 Melancholic
16:27 Gravilet Snanter4154
16:20 Chaise Speaking for Boskone7897
16:02 Skidmark
16:01 Skidmark
15:46 Skidmark
15:41 Skidmark
15:37 swksvolFF
15:36 Skidmark
15:34 Skidmark
15:27 Skidmark
14:48 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:16 NoMoreBS