in the vicinity
To meet Senate Democratic leaders to agree with Kavanaugh
Senate Democratic leaders to end their boycott and agree with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Boyd Matheson and Brad Miller join to discuss.
The first set of documents from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh to the time of George W. Bush in the White house were released on Thursday, including E-Mails sent in the wake of September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — news plays an important role in his upcoming hearing.
While most of the documents irrelevant, including lunch plans, and notifications of Parking tickets, some also have a window in Kavanaugh, the political orientation and how he worked with his colleagues.
In an October 2001 E-Mail chain, Kavanaugh, asked Mrs Courtney Elwood, check now the CIA’s general counsel, “to see if you had designed any additions/deductions” on some talking points about an anti-terrorism bill.
Among the talking points: the new legislation would “update the laws authorizing government surveillance” designed “in a time of rotary phones,” as he put it. Kavanaugh added that “the government of a modem war is currently fighting-a war that threatens our people and our way of life — with ancient weapons.”
Elwood wrote back: “Looks perfect. Really good work.”
And in 2003, after Kavanaugh wrote that he had outlined to complete a chart, as costs to treat political travel, colleague, Kimberly Douglass, wrote in an E-Mail to Kavanaugh, that “[t]hey, you should see a increase. Really. You should.”
But critics on Thursday the alarm about some of the Kavananugh the newly released post-9/11 E-Mails, including one that suggested that he thought more involvement in terrorist-detention policies than the Democrats.
One of the concerns in relation to Kavanaugh’s hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2006, when he was considered for the spot on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, he would have been more than a decade.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Kavanaugh asked about his role in the confirmation of William Haynes, the Defense Department’s general counsel, said that Haynes is the “architect of the discredited detention and interrogation policies.”
Kavanaugh I replied, “I was not involved and am not involved in the questions in accordance with the provisions relating to the detention of fighters or and so I don’t have the commitment.”
KAVANANUGH IS A BOOGEYMAN IN THE GUBERNATORIAL RACE
But a November 19, 2001 E-Mail to Kavanaugh by the Ministry of justice official, Pat O’brien, desired the support of the White House Counsel’s office on an upcoming hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
At the hearing, O’brien 9/11 actions, wrote in the E-Mail “post-judicial” under the microscope, including “military tribunals, the monitoring of atty /client conversations, racial profiling, etc.”
Later that day, the documents released Thursday show, Kavanaugh replied, a colleague in the White House Counsel’s office, Bradford Berenson: “I’m happy to help with this on the attorney-client Problem, but you should, of course, Tribunal treat.”
The White house pushed back on the suggestion that Kavanaugh had lied under oath, said on Thursday that the Durbin – related questions on topics such as attorney-client privilege at all.
“To no time Senator Durbin questions for the judge about other legal issues in connection with the fight against terrorism, said that as the prisoners’ rights,” White House spokesman Raj Shah.
The 5,700 pages of Kavanaugh, the time, the White house counsel’s office, a slim fraction of the available that have been posted on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s web-site, compiled by a lawyer, the former President as part of the GOP expedited review process.
Kavanaugh’s five years for Bush’s White House counsel and staff secretary, are the subject of a bitter dispute between the Senate Republicans and Democrats over the scope of the documents to be made available. The fight for the paper trail has come to dominate the debate on the confirmation of the 53-year-old appellate judge to reject replace judge Anthony Kennedy.
THE GOP GOVERNORS NOT TO SIGN A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF KAVANAUGH?
The records throw light on the question of Kavanaugh’s role in the selection of judicial nominees when he served in the White House counsel’s office. The documents showed he took an interest in news and editorial coverage of the Democratic resistance against some of Bush’s early nominees for appellate judges.
“That was great,” Kavanaugh wrote in an 8. In July 2001, E-Mail, that a copy of the “Washington Post” column by Benjamin Wittes, a member of the editorial board, so that in the case of “ideological interests in the appointment of lower court judges should not be overstated.” Wittes has critics as an outstanding Trump.
A further E-Mail carried the headline “Good editorial in the Chicago Tribune,” and included a piece calling on the Senate to act on Bush’s judicial nominations, “without delay.”
The records also contain volatile and extremely tame, insights into the emerging relationship between Kavanaugh and his future wife, Ashley Estes, who served as Secretary for the President. Kavanaugh said that was her first date the night before the September 11 attacks.
Estes asked Kavanaugh in an E-Mail on March 27, 2002, “what time do you have today and you are up for dinner, etc., or not?” Kavanaugh, replied a minute later, “Yes to the dinner; not sure about the time, but should be 7:30ish, maybe earlier.”
Kavanaugh ‘s a long time in the public service means that there is a long, voluminous record of documents relating to his time in the Bush White House, his work on Kenneth Starr’s team-President Bill Clinton and his judicial career.
The National Archives and Records Administration screening almost 1 million pages with reference to Kavanaugh the time, in the White house to ensure that none of the materials are subject to executive privilege under the Presidential Records Act. It says that the review will not be completed until the end of October.
After Kavanaugh of the candidate, Senate Republicans was a separation of the operation launched to start the White house to retrieve documents faster, direct from Bush’s team.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, has promised the most transparent process, compared to previous nominations. Already, the panel of thousands of other documents written to Kavanaugh, including its questionnaire, and its more than 300 cases before the court, as an appellate judge.
But Democrats complain that Bush’s lawyer was able to review and release the White house documents selectively, and on an accelerated basis, without the full overview from the archive.
Note: unless it was from the National Archives, and every document you see, judge Kavanaugh’s White House tenure, was selectively chosen for the release by his former Deputy, Bill Burck. This is not an objective process. https://t.co/FSDlOT9jJ5
— Senator Dick Durbin (@Senator Durbin) 9. August 2018
“Take note: unless it was from the National Archives, and every document you see, judge Kavanaugh’s White House tenure, was selectively chosen for the release by his former Deputy, bill Burck,” Durbin tweeted Thursday. “This is not an objective process.”
Democrats have complained that Republicans, the review of paperwork only of Kavanaugh’s work in the counsel’s office; the Democrats also wanted records of his three years as a Team Secretary, where he touches on almost every paper that Bush’s Desk. Burck worked under Kavanaugh on the Bush White House.
Because the Republicans hold the majority in the Senate, confirmation is likely, but with the Senate narrowly 51-49 split, you can’t afford a betrayal in their ranks, if all the Democrats not voting. Dates have not yet been defined, for the Kavanaugh hearings.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Gregg Re is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @gregg_re.