Connect with us

Bush Just Took FIRM Stand On Kavanaugh And People Are Furious About What He Had To Say

Published

on

Controversy regarding Judge Kavanaugh during the past few weeks has exploded. Everyone is divided into their own sides of the aisle. The opinion of one high profile politician could sway public opinion in a different direction, though.

The Daily Caller reported,

“Former President George W. Bush still supports Brett Kavanaugh after the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on sexual assault accusations against the Supreme Court nominee. Politico asked Bush on Thursday if he still supports Kavanaugh’s nomination.

“Yes, he does,” Freddy Ford, Bush’s chief of staff, said. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford testified on Thursday that Kavanaugh groped her and held his hand over her mouth at a high school party in the summer of 1982. Kavanaugh categorically denied the allegation and accused Democrats of conducting a coordinated smear against him.

In addition to his on the record support, Bush is also reportedly whipping votes for Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Jeff Flake of Arizona, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska have all received calls from Bush in recent days urging them to support Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh served as an associate counsel in the White House and then staff secretary during Bush’s presidency. When Kavanaugh was first accused of sexual misconduct by Ford, Bush said, “Laura [Bush] and I have known and respected Brett Kavanaugh for decades, and we stand by our comments the night Judge Kavanaugh was nominated: ‘He is a fine husband, father, and friend — and a man of the highest integrity.’”

Business Insider reported,

“According to The Post, in recent days, Bush has contacted at least some of the senators seen as swing votes — Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin and Republican Sens. Susan Collins, Jeff Flake, and Lisa Murkowski — to discuss their votes as Kavanaugh faces multiple allegations of sexual misconduct.

The Post’s report suggests Bush decided to contact the senators because they’re less likely to be swayed by President Donald Trump. The report indicates Bush called the senators before Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused him of sexually assaulting her when they were teenagers in the 1980s, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday.

Flake announced on Friday that he would vote to confirm Kavanaugh. Shortly after releasing his statement, Flake was confronted by survivors of sexual assault as he headed to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Kavanaugh worked for Bush during the 2000 presidential-election recount in Florida. Three years later, Bush nominated Kavanaugh into the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Kavanaugh was Bush’s White House staff secretary until 2006, while his confirmation to the court was delayed. Bush voiced his support for Kavanaugh in July when Trump tapped the judge as his choice for the Supreme Court seat.

“He is a fine husband, father, and friend — and a man of the highest integrity,” Bush said of Kavanaugh. “He will make a superb Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.” Bush reaffirmed his support of Kavanaugh after Ford’s allegation surfaced, saying he and his wife “stand by our comments.”

Kavanaugh has denied the allegations of sexual misconduct against him. The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday heard hours of emotional testimony from Ford and Kavanaugh. The Senate is expected to vote on his confirmation on Friday afternoon.”

Judge Kavanaugh’s history with the president goes way back. After he finished his clerkship in the Supreme Court he worked with Ken Starr in 1997 as Associate Counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel. Some of his colleagues included the likes of Alex Azar and Rod Rosenstein.

While at the White House he dealt with many different types of constitutional and legal issues. He even partook in the investigation into the death of Vincent Foster. During this investigation, Kavanaugh was criticized for investing money that came from the federal government into investigations of so-called conspiracy theories that were partisan.

Several years later in December 2000, Judge Kavanaugh started working with President Bush regarding the ballot recount issues in Florida. Shortly thereafter, he was brought on as an associate by the White House Counsel, who at the time was Alberto Gonzales.

He worked on the scandal surrounding Enron, the nomination of now Supreme Couty Justice John Roberts, as well as the nomination process of Miguel Estrada which was ultimately unsuccessful. A few years later, he started serving as an Assistant to the President and the White House Staff Secretary. He had succeeded Harriet Miers.

President Bush eventually nominated Judge Kavanaugh to the United States Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. The vacancy was created by Judge Laurence Silberman. For over three years his nomination was stalled in the Senate. Senator Dick Durban called him the Forrest Gump of Republican politics and accused him of being too partisan. Not much has changed since then in that regard.

Share if you think it says a lot that the former president is continuing to advocate for Judge Kavanaugh.

Share if you think Judge Kavanaugh is innocent.

Share if you think this whole process has been a disgrace.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


VIDEO: Rashida Tlaib: Dems Discussing Arresting Trump Officials

Published

on

...

* By

It’s crystal clear..that the left should never ever be allowed into our government. These are dangerous folks.

Maybe Rashida should be arrested for her connections to Islamic terrorists. The fact that this woman is in our government…is despicable!

Via The Daily Wire:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) stated on Tuesday that House Democrats were discussing behind closed doors how to arrest the members of President Donald Trump’s administration who did not comply with congressional subpoenas.

“Let me tell you, this is pretty — and this is the last caucus conversation we had. Do you know this is really unprecedented? This is the worst time we’ve ever had a situation like this,” Tlaib said during a town hall meeting. “So they’re trying to figure out — no joke — they’re trying to figure out, ‘Well, is it the D.C. police that goes and gets them?’ No, no.”

“What are we hoping? I mean, I’m not in those kinds of conversations, but I’m asking, like, you know, what happens? And they’re like, ‘Well, Rashida, we’re trying to figure it out ourselves because this is uncharted territory,’” she continued. “No, I’m telling you that they’re trying to be like, ‘Well, where are we going to put them? Where are we going to hold them?’ No, I mean those are the kinds of things they’re trying to tread carefully.”

Accordingly, in an escalating effort to force White House officials comply with congressional subpoenas, House Democrats have reportedly been reexamining holding those members of the administration in inherent contempt — a power that the legislature has not used since 1935.

The Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) explains that inherent contempt is the oldest of three strategies that Congress can use to enforce subpoenas. According to the Washington, D.C.-based think tank:

“Since 1935, Congress has relied on the executive and judicial branches when people refuse to comply with congressional subpoenas. This practice makes sense: if Congress cannot get the information it needs on its own authority, then it can rely on the authority of the other branches of government. However, there is another option. Instead of turning to another branch, Congress can legally imprison or fine individuals who refuse to comply.”

Tlaib incorrectly suggested that the process could be enforced by the Washington, D.C. Police Department — the procedure actually only involves the chamber that is concerned. Following a contempt citation, the individual is arrested by the chamber’s sergeant-at-arms, and subsequently brought to the floor for punishment, which may include imprisonment.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Whistleblower Didn’t Follow Law: Went To Schiff’s House Intel Panel Before IG

Published

on

...

* By

This pretty much explains the Democrat party. When do any of them follow the law? None of them have ever been held accountable for the laws they continue to break.

It is important for the American people to fight back. These politicians believe they are above the law. Time to stop allowing that.

Via Breitbart:

A CIA officer whistleblower failed to follow the law for protecting members of the intelligence community (IC) seeking to report government malfeasance by going to the Democrat head of the House Intelligence Community before the IC inspector general (IG).

On Wednesday, the New York Times (NYT) revealed:

The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistleblower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials.

However, the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA) of 1998 explicitly requires an official concerned about wrongdoing within the government to go to the IC inspector general before the congressional panels in charge of oversight of the intelligence community.

Under a section titled, “Summary of Procedures for Reporting Urgent Concerns Pursuant to the ICWPA,” the official Director of National Intelligence (DNI) website states:

The employee may contact the congressional intelligence committees directly as described in clause (i) only if the employee –

a. before making such a contact, furnishes to the DNI, through the IC IG, a statement of the employee’s complaint or information and notice of the employee’s intent to contact the congressional intelligence committees directly; and
b. obtains and follows from the DNI, through the IC IG, direction on how to contact the congressional intelligence committees in accordance with necessary and appropriate security procedures.

The CIA whistleblower in question went to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff’s office days before the intelligence community’s inspector general, the internal investigator, and watchdog.

Investigators from the office of the IC IG are expected to operate independently of political leadership in government.

Via Breitbart:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) knew about the “whistleblower” complaint days before it was officially filed, it was reported on Wednesday.

Schiff – who performed a dramatized version of President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky during last week’s hearing – was aware of the broad contents of the “whistleblower” complaint days before the partisan CIA official formally filed the complaint, the New York Times reported.

After the detailing his accusations to the “the agency’s top lawyer,” the “whistleblower” took his complaint to a House Intelligence Committee aide, who relayed the information to Schiff, who is largely leading the charge on the impeachment inquiry.

Per the New York Times:

Before going to Congress, the C.I.A. officer had a colleague convey his accusations to the agency’s top lawyer. Concerned about how that avenue for airing his allegations was unfolding, the officer then approached a House Intelligence Committee aide, alerting him to the accusation against Mr. Trump. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.

The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff or anyone else, an official said.

As the Times detailed, the “whistleblower” eventually brought the complaint to Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community, as Schiff’s aide suggested. That move “gave the whistle-blower added protections against reprisals and also allowed him to legally report on classified information,” the Times reports:

While House Intelligence Committee members are allowed to receive classified whistle-blower complaints, they are not allowed to make such complaints public, according to a former official. A complaint forwarded to the committee by the inspector general gives it more latitude over what it can publicize.

By the time the whistle-blower filed his complaint, Mr. Schiff and his staff knew at least vaguely what it contained.

The complaint – based entirely on second-hand information – ultimately led to the release of the transcript, detailing the contents of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky. The transcripts do not show the president engaging in quid pro quo for dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden, as Schiff suggested during his fabricated reenactment at last week’s hearing.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

[ifform list="4174" submit="Subscribe"]

Send this to a friend