[PhiKapMom]

I have tried to bold important paragraphs!

BTW -- these are revised comments that made it into the Congressional record. We need to transcribe here on the live threads what these RATs are saying as when they revise their comments for the Congressonal record, they change like Ms. Clinton's also changed.

This from Leahy's comments: "Again, you have to ask why. What is in there that they don't want us to see?" My question would be why they are so intent on seeing his working papers on various cases including dealing with the Clintons?

Need a good reason to work to confirm Estrada? Here it is:

We do know some things about him. According to news accounts, after one of his mentors, Kenneth Starr, left the Office of the Solicitor General, he said Estrada was ``left working for a Justice Department whose views he didn't always agree with.''

[PhiKapMom]

This is the Bush 2004/Senate ping list because it is the only one I have!

It is quite evidence from Leahy's revised comments from The Congressiona Record that the DemocRATS are opposed to Miguel Estrada for several main reasons:

1. Estrada is considered a conservative and pro-life

2. Estrada worked in the Clinton Solicitor General's office and didn't always agree with the DOJ. That means he had access from 1993 - 1997 to all the Clinton Crime Family scandels and most likely made memo's on them.

3. Estrada participated in the Bush/Cheney appeal to the SCOTUS as part of the law firm.

4. Estrada is a protege of Ken Starr and Ted Olson it seems and I will throw in Rudy who he worked for in the Southern District of NY.

5. Estrada is wealthy!

Any more reasons would be appreciated as I just hit what I considered the highlights of their attacks on Estrada!

[alloysteel]

It is not that Miguel Estrada has refused to answer the questions posed by the Judiciary Committee. He answered every one of them which he had been permitted to answer, using the guidelines set up by earlier leadership of the Judiciary Committee. As for the ones he did answer, those responses were simply not the right answers to please Sen. Leahy.

[PhiKapMom]

This is the Bush 2004/Senate ping list because it is the only one I have!

It is quite evidence from Leahy's revised comments from The Congressiona Record that the DemocRATS are opposed to Miguel Estrada for several main reasons:

1. Estrada is considered a conservative and pro-life

2. Estrada worked in the Clinton Solicitor General's office and didn't always agree with the DOJ. That means he had access from 1993 - 1997 to all the Clinton Crime Family scandels and most likely made memo's on them.

3. Estrada participated in the Bush/Cheney appeal to the SCOTUS as part of the law firm.

4. Estrada is a protege of Ken Starr and Ted Olson it seems and I will throw in Rudy who he worked for in the Southern District of NY.

5. Estrada is wealthy!

Any more reasons would be appreciated as I just hit what I considered the highlights of their attacks on Estrada!

[nicmarlo]

Bookmarked for several reasons: for later read and as a record of his exact remarks to be used against him later.....and there will be a later, mark my words.

[Wait4Truth]

Isn't it fair to ask, when they prepared such material, whether they did it in a fair, evenhanded fashion? Or did they do it in an ideological manner? Did they do it to carry out an agenda?

And if this was the basis for confirmation of a judicial appointment, none of clinton's nominees would have ever become judges!!!!!!!!!!!!! Leahy is a maggot!

[SquirrelKing]

SEN. LEAHY: Blah blah blah blah blah racist blah blah conservative blah blah abortion blah blah...blah...Zzzzzz (snore)......(Dream of golf)...

I think I hit the main points.

[meandog]

Leahy, you Vermont A-hole, I'd like to smash your face right between the sides of the hair around your bald pate and knock your chicklet teeth over the Senate floor. You didn't complain when your favorite New England nominee, David Souter, didn't answer questions; and you didn't breathe a word of protest when Ruth Bader Ginsburg didn't answer any questions!

[Dan from Michigan]

Leahy is worse than Hitlery.

[nfldgirl]

Presidents come and go. I respect all the Presidents and admire their willingness to lead our great country. But the Senate stays here long after any individual President.

And this is part of the problem that is "Washington." Too many dispicably, anti-Constitution senators, by far, over-extend their welcome in Washington. Too bad the sheeple out there continue to stay asleep at the wheel, instead of doing their duty as American citizens to dethrone the true enemies of our Constitutional Republic!!!! Arrrgggghhh!!!

[Stand Watch Listen]

Thanks for all your efforts...appreciate it.

Related Articles: and past Democratic Senate obstructionism

The Minority Democrats' War In The Senate For Control Of America
Source: Toogood Reports; Published: Febraury 28, 2003; Author: Mary Mostert

Senate Democrats: Filibusters Are No Longer Just For The Floor
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 28, 2003; Author: John Nowacki

Ted Kennedy's Grand Design
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 27, 2003; Author: Robert D. Novak

Linda Chavez: Republicans Need To Call Dems' Bluff On Estrada Nomination
Source: CNSNES.com; Published: February 26, 2003; Author Linda Chavez

Senate Democrats Can't Get Their Facts Straight
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: February 14, 2003; Author: John Nowacki

Leahy’s Surprise Attack
Source: National Review Online; Published: October 9, 2002; Author: Byron York

Shedded by Judiciary: Senate Democrats cast off another appointee
Source: Wall St Journal; Published: October 9, 2002

Miguel Estrada May be Next Victim Of Judiciary's 'Gang Of Ten'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: September 09, 2002; Author: Paul M. Weyrich

Toward Priscilla Owen, Not Even The Pretense Of Fairness
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: August 01, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

The Owen Nomination: Liberals Don't Let Truth Stand In Their Way
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: July 18, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Democrats Hold Judicial Nominations for 406 Days and Counting
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: June 21, 2002; Author: Christine Hall

Judge The Senate Judiciary Committee Not By What It Says, But What It Has Done
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: | June 06, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

The Left Keeps Trying -- And Failing -- To Smear Brooks Smith
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: May 16, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Pickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: March 07, 2002; Author: Jeff Johnson

Make them pay for 'Borking': David Limbaugh rebukes spineless Republicans to support Pickering
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 5, 2002; Author: David Limbaugh

The GOP's Post-Pickering Strategy
Source: National Review Online; Published: March 1, 2002; Author: Byron York

Pickering Fight Shows Liberals At Their Worst
Source: Roll Call.com; Publblished: February 21, 2002; Author: Mort Kondracke

Still Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Dismantling Democracy through Judicial Activism
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 12, 2002; Author:Tom Jipping

'A Troubling Pattern': Ideology Over Truth In Judicial Confirmations
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 10, 2002; Author: Paul E. Scates

Democrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002; Susan Jones

The Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002; Author:Byron York

SYMPOSIUM Q: Should the Senate Take Ideology into Account in Judicial Confirmations
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: February 4, 2002;
Authors:
Ralph G. Neas -- YES: The ideology of nominees for the federal judiciary matters more now than ever
Roger Pilon -- NO: Since judges apply law, not make it, the Senate's concern should be with judicial temperament

What is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Blasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002; Matt Pyeatt

Judicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Senator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001; Author: By John Nowacki

Senator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001; Author: Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

A Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001

Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001; Author:Editorial

Sen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001; Author: Paul E. Scates

Judicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001; Author: Audrey Hudson

Patrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001; Author: William A. Mayer

Judicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001

Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001

Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Partisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001; Author: John Nowacki

Leahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Obedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Why is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published: October 26, 2001; Author: Mary Mostert

Pat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001; Author: John Nowacki

Operation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001; Author: T.L.Jipping

Daschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001; Author: Dave Boyer

Leahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001

Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001; Author: Tom Jipping

Dems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

[Stand Watch Listen]

Thanks for all your efforts...appreciate it.

Related Articles: and past Democratic Senate obstructionism

The Minority Democrats' War In The Senate For Control Of America
Source: Toogood Reports; Published: Febraury 28, 2003; Author: Mary Mostert

Senate Democrats: Filibusters Are No Longer Just For The Floor
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 28, 2003; Author: John Nowacki

Senator Leahy's Comments on Senate Floor against Estrada (26 Feb 2003) (Revised)
Source: The Congressional Record (New Search required each time); Published: 27 Feb 2003; Author: | Sen Patrick Leahy (D-VT)

Ted Kennedy's Grand Design
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 27, 2003; Author: Robert D. Novak

Linda Chavez: Republicans Need To Call Dems' Bluff On Estrada Nomination
Source: CNSNES.com; Published: February 26, 2003; Author Linda Chavez

Senate Democrats Can't Get Their Facts Straight
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: February 14, 2003; Author: John Nowacki

Leahy’s Surprise Attack
Source: National Review Online; Published: October 9, 2002; Author: Byron York

Shedded by Judiciary: Senate Democrats cast off another appointee
Source: Wall St Journal; Published: October 9, 2002

Miguel Estrada May be Next Victim Of Judiciary's 'Gang Of Ten'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: September 09, 2002; Author: Paul M. Weyrich

Toward Priscilla Owen, Not Even The Pretense Of Fairness
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: August 01, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

The Owen Nomination: Liberals Don't Let Truth Stand In Their Way
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: July 18, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Democrats Hold Judicial Nominations for 406 Days and Counting
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: June 21, 2002; Author: Christine Hall

Judge The Senate Judiciary Committee Not By What It Says, But What It Has Done
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: | June 06, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

The Left Keeps Trying -- And Failing -- To Smear Brooks Smith
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: May 16, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Pickering Battle Places Congress on Verge of 'Institutional Crisis'
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: March 07, 2002; Author: Jeff Johnson

Make them pay for 'Borking': David Limbaugh rebukes spineless Republicans to support Pickering
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: March 5, 2002; Author: David Limbaugh

The GOP's Post-Pickering Strategy
Source: National Review Online; Published: March 1, 2002; Author: Byron York

Pickering Fight Shows Liberals At Their Worst
Source: Roll Call.com; Publblished: February 21, 2002; Author: Mort Kondracke

Still Pestering Pickering
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 19, 2002; Author: John Nowacki

Dismantling Democracy through Judicial Activism
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 12, 2002; Author:Tom Jipping

'A Troubling Pattern': Ideology Over Truth In Judicial Confirmations
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: February 10, 2002; Author: Paul E. Scates

Democrats Blast Bush Judicial Nominee
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published: February 08, 2002; Susan Jones

The Next Big Fight: The first major judicial-confirmation battle of the Bush administration.
Source: National Review: Published: Feburary 6, 2002; Author:Byron York

SYMPOSIUM Q: Should the Senate Take Ideology into Account in Judicial Confirmations
Source: INSIGHT magazine; Published: February 4, 2002;
Authors:
Ralph G. Neas -- YES: The ideology of nominees for the federal judiciary matters more now than ever
Roger Pilon -- NO: Since judges apply law, not make it, the Senate's concern should be with judicial temperament

What is the Judiciary Committee Trying to Hide?
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: January 29, 2002; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Blasting Conservative Judges: Liberals Launch Their Campaign
Source: cnsnews.com; Published: January 24 2002; Matt Pyeatt

Judicial Confirmation Lies, Deception and Cover-up
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: December 11, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Senator Leahy Does Not Meet His Own Standards
Source:.cnsnews.com; Published: December 07, 2001; Author: By John Nowacki

Senator Daschle Must Remove 'Leaky Leahy' From Judiciary Committee
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 4, 2001; Author: Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

A Disgraceful Blocking of Nominees
Source: The Wall Street Journal (ltr to ed) Published December 3, 2001

Mr. Leahy's Fuzzy Math
Source: Washington Times;Published: December 3, 2001; Author:Editorial

Sen. Patrick Leahy; Our Constitutional Conscience?
Source: Too Good Reports; Published: December 2, 2001; Author: Paul E. Scates

Judicial confirmations called significantly low
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 30, 2001; Author: Audrey Hudson

Patrick Leahy - Words Do Kill
Source: PipeBombNews.com; Published: November 29, 2001; Author: William A. Mayer

Judicial Profiling
Source: The Wall Street Journal; Published: November 27, 2001

Sen. Leahy's judicial hostages
Source: Washington Times; Published: November 21, 2001

Judges Delayed is Justice Denied
Source: CNSNews.com ; Published: November 20, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Partisanship is Prevalent with Leahy's Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: November 15, 2001; Author: John Nowacki

Leahy And Daschle Are Coming Face To Face With Their Own Words
Obedient Democrats
Source: CNSNEWS.com; Published October 26, 2001; Author: Thomas L. Jipping

Why is Daschle Blocking Judges needed to Try Terrorists when we Catch them?
Source: Banner of Liberty; Published: October 26, 2001; Author: Mary Mostert

Pat Leahy's Passive Aggressive Game
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: October 25, 2001; Author: John Nowacki

Operation Obstruct Justice
Source: Washington Times; Published: October 25, 2001; Author: T.L.Jipping

Daschle wins struggle over judicial nominations
Source: The Washington Times; Published: Oct 24, 2001; Author: Dave Boyer

Leahy doctrine ensures judicial gridlock
Source: Washington Times; Published October 22, 2001

Senate's judicial powergrab: Tom Jipping tracks Dems' assault on courts
Source: WorldNetDaily.com; Published: June 28, 2001; Author: Tom Jipping

Dems Will Shut Down Judicial Confirmations
Source: CNSNews.com Commentary from the Free Congress Foundation; Published: June 13, 2001;
Author: Thomas L. Jipping

[nothingnew]

Leahy is a dangerous man and should be removed with extreme prejudice...(by the voters, of course...ha ha haha).

FMCDH

[StoneColdTaxHater]

The behavior of the RATS makes me ill. I wish the RINOS would have made them push a true filibuster. 24x7 365 if that's what it takes and expose the RATS for the dirty political scum that they are. But of course the RINOS play nice. Makes me sick!

[timestax]

This leaky Leahy is NOT human!!

[Owatamla]

Presidents come and go. I respect all the Presidents and admire their willingness to lead our great country. But the Senate stays here long after any individual President.

Isn't that a crying shame! Well past your usefulness.

[harpo11]

Democrats speak with forked tongues spending precious time and our tax payer money in the destruction of a good solid upstanding hard working man and our beloved Constitution.

[MinuteGal]

The three most cunning and vicious snakes in the senate are Leahy, Biden and Durbin. They are truly an axis of evil.

Even Hillary, as despicable and amoral as she is, has a long way to go to catch up with the vile rhetoric of these three maggots.

Leni

[votelife]

PhiKap, we need to keep the Estrada issue front and center!

Dear President Bush,
With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.

[Rummyfan]

Leahy - the Senate's preeminent gasbag!