So here’s where Kagan stands:
1. The DOJ/WH ‘tried’ to keep her out of the loop. (did they fail?)
2. Holder states: “My memory is, whenever we had conversations about the health care bill, then-Solicitor General Kagan was not present...” (Worthless from a known liar & why just use your memory? Why not check your logs, meeting minutes, your own daily diary, etc.?)
3.Mr. Smith said that walling off wouldn’t have occurred until March, leaving the two-month gap he questioned. (Release the documents proving otherwise, but they won’t. Why not? They provide no legal basis for withholding)
4. Mr. Holder also again declined to cite a specific legal privilege that would allow him to withhold documents or prevent committee investigators from interviewing department employees about Justice Kagan’s involvement. Instead, the attorney general said he has “separation of powers” concerns. (The Obama Administration worried about the Constitution? Surely you jest.)
Now, look at Carney’s carefully worded response (aka the non-denial denial):
Asked by The Washington Times whether Mr. Obama would support turning over documents covering the two-month period in question, presidential spokesman Jay Carney said Congress already has fully vetted Justice Kagan’s views.
“Justice Kagan was confirmed with bipartisan support to the Supreme Court, went through the usual thorough confirmation process,” Mr. Carney said.
Mr. Carney also pointed to an Op-Ed column by Michael B. Mukasey, former attorney general under Republican President George W. Bush, who wrote this week that for Justice Kagan to recuse herself, she “would have had to participate in her official capacity as counsel or adviser in the case at any stage, or expressed an opinion in her official capacity about the merits” of the case.
“Asked during her confirmation proceedings whether she had done so, she said no,” Mr. Mukasey wrote. “Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason not to credit that denial.”
Said Mr. Carney, “We agree with him.”
So, A. She’s already been vetted, please stop looking and B. Mr. Mukasey ‘agrees with us’.
Yet, Mukasey is careful because he clearly states: “Absent evidence to the contrary, there is no reason not to credit that denial.”
Release the missing 2 months of documents and then we’ll know whether or not the evidence is ‘absent’.
“Release the missing 2 months of documents and then we’ll know whether or not the evidence is ‘absent’.”
Absolutely!!!
(Particularly because there are so many liars in this administration who really believe that “the end justifies the means.”)
They are using the two months as a ruse...she should recuse herself if she was involved at ANYTIME in the matter, not just when they heard she may be considered to be a nominee.