web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > impeachment

Kavanaugh book authors: It sure is a shame that people rushed to judgment about impeaching him after that NYT story

Westlake Legal Group b-16 Kavanaugh book authors: It sure is a shame that people rushed to judgment about impeaching him after that NYT story The Blog pogrebin nyt New York Times kelly kavanaugh impeachment

It really is wacky how readers overreacted to a new claim in the country’s most respected paper that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman while in college — after the story neglected to mention that the supposed victim doesn’t remember it happening.

I grudgingly admire the sheer balls it takes for these two to blame readers for flying off the handle about a piece which they and their editors at the Times presented in the worst possible light for their subject. And not just with the new assault allegation. Remember, they grossly oversold how much corroboration there was for Deborah Ramirez’s original claim of an assault by Kavanaugh. And they neglected to showcase the bombshell detail that Ford’s friend, Leland Keyser, doesn’t believe Ford’s story to this day but felt threatened if she didn’t say otherwise.

If you weren’t feeling up to drink on a Friday night, you will soon.

“It’s dismaying to see the rush to judgment,” said Kate Kelly, a New York Times reporter and co-author of “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh,” in an interview on the Yahoo News podcast “Skullduggery.”

“We definitely have been grappling with it for sure,” said co-author and fellow Times reporter Robin Pogrebin when asked about the firestorm the initial accounts of their book triggered. “There was a sense going into this that nuance doesn’t make headlines, … that people were going to pull stuff out. … People saw what they wanted to see before learning any of the facts, or didn’t even make much of an effort to pay attention to the facts.”

Omit the key facts, then scold readers for not paying attention to them. It’s like a “Where’s Waldo?” book where the authors forgot to include Waldo.

Here’s something else about Kavanaugh that might have helped restrain the “rush to judgment” if it had been given a more prominent place in the Times piece:

The authors also noted that they had found no evidence of Kavanaugh mistreating women as an adult — to the contrary, he had heavily promoted and mentored them — and that the image of him in some circles as a hard-right conservative was off. “This is a jurist who is known for his thoughtfulness, who’s known for pragmatism, and less kind of predictably ideological,” said Kelly.

In other words, basically the exact opposite of the type of guy you would think he was from the new — unsupported — sexual assault allegation.

Maybe there’ll be a little justice, though. Not now, not soon, but next fall in the form of a backlash to the smear campaign at the polls. Harry Enten argues that Kavanaugh politics are bad politics for Democrats:

Indeed, the 2018 exit polls suggest that Kavanaugh was a net negative for Democrats across the Senate landscape. One question on some state exit polls asked voters whether a senator’s Kavanaugh nomination vote was important to them. In every state but one (Florida) where the Republican senator voted for Kavanaugh or the Democratic senator voted against him, it was a net negative for the Democratic Senate nominee.

In these seven states (all but one carried by Trump in 2016), those who said a senator’s Kavanaugh vote was important to their choice for Senate were far more likely to vote Republican for Senate. In these states, the Republican Senate candidates won by an average of 18 points among those who said a senator’s Kavanaugh vote was important to them. Among those who said the Kavanaugh vote wasn’t important, the Democratic Senate candidate won by an average of 7 points.

Democrats are going to need to win at least a couple of seats in red states next year in order to take back a Senate majority. Did the “rush to judgment” this past week make that easier for them or harder?

Even so, they’ll never stop targeting him, writes Peggy Noonan. Exit quotation: “[P]rogressives have to prove they were right to advance the sexual-assault accusations of Christine Blasey Ford. They lost that battle; Justice Kavanaugh sits on the court. They won’t stop the assault until they can prove they were right to launch it.”

The post Kavanaugh book authors: It sure is a shame that people rushed to judgment about impeaching him after that NYT story appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group b-16-300x153 Kavanaugh book authors: It sure is a shame that people rushed to judgment about impeaching him after that NYT story The Blog pogrebin nyt New York Times kelly kavanaugh impeachment   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Watch: Anti-Trump Veterans Group Says Dan Crenshaw “Hid” From Their Questions, but Video Tells Different Story

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-620x317 Watch: Anti-Trump Veterans Group Says Dan Crenshaw “Hid” From Their Questions, but Video Tells Different Story washington D.C. Veterans Texas Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina military Media journalism Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Dan Crenshaw Culture Congress Common Defense Allow Media Exception

Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, left, listens as Office of Management and Budget Acting Director Russell Vought testifies before the House Budget Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 12, 2019, during a hearing on the fiscal year 2020 budget. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

An anti-Trump veterans group called “Common Defense” posted video to their Twitter account Thursday of two men described as combat veterans aggressively following Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) to an elevator while questioning his support for President Trump.

The group, which bills itself as “the country’s only veteran-led grassroots organization committed to engaging, training and mobilizing veterans to elect accountable leaders and promote progressive values in 2020 and beyond”, is in favor of impeaching the President. Crenshaw, a wounded war veteran who served multiple tours in Afghanistan, is not.

In a teaser they published along with the video, the group states “GOP Rep @DanCrenshawTX hid in an elevator today when combat vets confronted him about his support for Donald Trump.” Watch the 2+ minute video below:

“[We have confirmed] the identities of the men as U.S. Army veterans Jason Hurd, 40, and Alan Pitts, 36, a Purple Heart recipient,” Newsweek reported.

It’s not my place to get in the middle of a “veteran vs. veteran” battle, but this video angered me for a number of reasons:

1) Crenshaw did not “hide” from anyone. The video clearly shows attempts by Crenshaw, who maintained his composure, to engage in conversation within 20 seconds of the encounter starting.

Once they made it to the elevator, Crenshaw pointed out it was a “members only” elevator. There’s a reason it’s stipulated that way for members of Congress and their staff that pretty much everyone should understand (safety and security, hello?). It had nothing to do with “hiding.”

2) As Crenshaw pointed out, they were there to make a video, not to have a dialogue. This was to promote their group, not to have a substantive back and forth. Crenshaw tried a number of times to respond to what was being said but the guy stalking him just continued to talk over him, actually questioning his commitment to his country.

3) At one point, the guy on Crenshaw’s heels says “you need to get your courage back, man.” He said this to a Navy SEAL who lost his eye in combat, and who then decided to continue to serve his country once he came home by running for Congress. I don’t think he needs a lecture on courage from anyone.

I asked people on my Twitter feed to give me their takes on what happened, and was especially interested in takes from military veterans. Here are some of the responses:

(Duke confirmed with me that he actually meant to say Crenshaw “would not owe political allegiance” to combat veterans even if he wasn’t one himself.)

Sadly, instead of doing actual journalism on this story, Newsweek decided to write about it using the very same biased take Common Defense gave:

Apologies for the typos in that last tweet. By that point I was really annoyed, not just with how Common Defense had falsely portrayed what happened, but with Newsweek treating the group’s spin as the gospel truth.

This is clearly a case of a blockbuster story not coming anywhere close to living up to the hype. The actual footage shows a far different story than how both Common Defense and Newsweek spun it. In reality, Crenshaw handled what happened in a much classier way than how others in a similar position would have.

—–
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Watch: Anti-Trump Veterans Group Says Dan Crenshaw “Hid” From Their Questions, but Video Tells Different Story appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-300x153 Watch: Anti-Trump Veterans Group Says Dan Crenshaw “Hid” From Their Questions, but Video Tells Different Story washington D.C. Veterans Texas Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina military Media journalism Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Dan Crenshaw Culture Congress Common Defense Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Roll Call: Suddenly Democrats are looking to pivot from impeachment

Westlake Legal Group Pelosi Roll Call: Suddenly Democrats are looking to pivot from impeachment The Blog Suburbs Legislation impeachment House Democrats 2020 Elections

Well, some Democrats, anyway. With the first year of a Democratic House majority slipping away and little to show for it except grandstanding by Jerrold Nadler and Adam Schiff, their leadership has become desperate to change the subject back to legislating. The release today of a pharmaceutical pricing reform bill — a shared priority of Donald Trump’s, no less — provides Democrats with a narrative changer, Roll Call reports.

Assuming they want it, of course:

House Democratic leaders’ plan to release a top-priority prescription drug pricing bill on Thursday presents the caucus with an opportunity to refocus its messaging on legislating over investigating — one that many Democrats say is desperately needed.

Moderate Democrats in particular are concerned that the caucus’s policy work isn’t breaking through the impeachment cloud that has overshadowed the 116th Congress.

What policy work? They haven’t passed anything major at all that has a chance of being passed in the Senate. Nancy Pelosi did get HR1 passed, the Democratic cri de coeur on election security that would have all but nationalized elections. Mitch McConnell repeatedly warned that it would be a dead letter in the Senate. Otherwise, the first nine months of the year have been the Nadler-Schiff Show, complete with its Two-Part Mueller Flop episode.

The members whose midterm wins gave Pelosi the gavel are getting sick and tired of investigations taking priority over legislation. That follows some data that John noted on Monday, showing a large disconnect between their voters’ priorities and what they perceived as House Dems’ priorities:

“Moderate members desperately would like to tell the story of what’s actually going right in the United States Congress. I think people would be very interested in that message,” said Oregon Rep. Kurt Schrader, who heads the political arm of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition. “Despite the speaker trying to get it out, it doesn’t seem to be getting out.”

To Schrader’s point, an internal Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee polling memo leaked to Politico showed that a majority of voters surveyed in the national mid-August poll perceived Democrats’ top priority to be investigating Trump. More respondents said their personal priorities were health care and immigration than respondents who perceived those issues as priorities for Democrats.

That is the gravest danger for Democrats in the upcoming election, and practically a replay of the trap Republicans set for themselves in 1998. Democrats need to hold these seats in 2020 not just to retain their House majority, but also to compete against Trump for an Electoral College win. As I write in my column at The Week, the situation has changed a lot in the suburbs since the midterms, and Democrats haven’t:

In 2018, the special counsel investigation into “Russiagate” was still very much in play. Democrats pressed hard on the potential necessity to remove Trump because of an illegitimate election in 2016. That fueled turnout among Democrats while potentially depressing the Republican vote. Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report ended the Russiagate narrative, which means that voters won’t be responding to a legitimacy argument in the next election.

On top of that, continuing efforts by Democrats to impeach Trump might well backfire by enraging the same voters who sat out in the midterms. While popular among progressive activists, polling on impeachment among all voters has always been poor and is now declining even further. Democrats are now issuing double-talk statements on impeachment while holding hearings to demand that marginal figures like former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski read aloud from the Mueller report. The more they talk about impeachment, the less voters — perhaps especially suburban voters — will feel Democrats are focused on them.

Immigration might be an area where both Trump and Democrats could kill their own hopes. That’s another area where the ground has changed but Democrats have not kept up:

Trump made a strategic error in filling his midterm messaging with dire tales of “invasions,” which clearly turned off swing voters. One year later, however, the border situation has settled down, thanks in large part to Trump’s maneuvering with Mexico and a fight to change asylum rules at the border. If he can maintain both of those policies, Trump and the GOP can replace the scare stories with claims of progress. If, on the other hand, Trump returns to his hysterical rhetoric about invading hordes, or if border security breaks down, those suburban voters might stay on the other side of the aisle in disgust.

In contrast, Democrats have insisted on swinging further to the left on immigration. So many of their presidential contenders have spoken about decriminalizing border crossings that former Obama-era attorney general Eric Holder had to rebuke them publicly, telling CNN’s David Axelrod: “Borders mean something.”

Open borders might sell well in Democrats’ progressive power base of urban cores, and perhaps even a little in agriculture-heavy areas where cheap labor means better bottom lines. But it won’t sell in the suburbs.

There’s a lot more that goes into calculations for electoral success in 2020, such as candidate quality and organization, but the latter isn’t a beacon of hope for Democrats either. If Democrats want to compete in 2020, they first have to recognize that it’s not 2018 any longer. Trump-hatred won’t push them across the finish line on its own. If they don’t start accomplishing something with their majority, voters will ask themselves why they gave it to Pelosi in the first place.

The post Roll Call: Suddenly Democrats are looking to pivot from impeachment appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Pelosi-300x153 Roll Call: Suddenly Democrats are looking to pivot from impeachment The Blog Suburbs Legislation impeachment House Democrats 2020 Elections   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

This Picture Tells You Everything You Need to Know About Impeachment

WASHINGTON — The photograph has all the trappings of a Renaissance painting — crowded with characters, action and emotion — only this one is set in a congressional hearing room and features figures frequently found on C-Span.

It captures a small moment in a big event: The first hearing by the House Judiciary Committee officially called to determine whether to impeach President Trump. But to look at the frame, captured on Tuesday by Doug Mills, a New York Times photographer, is to understand something deeper about the forces at play as the House grapples with the prospect of trying to remove Mr. Trump.

We decided to give it a close reading.

Doug Mills/The New York Times

At the center of it all

Mr. Nadler, a long-serving progressive from Manhattan, is literally in the middle of the impeachment debate — not just between the Republicans and Democrats seen here, but between competing factions of his own party. Mr. Nadler and most of his fellow Democrats on the committee have become increasingly outspoken about their support for “vindicating the Constitution” through an impeachment vote, but moderates in the party remain deeply skeptical, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi has publicly downplayed the effort.

The photograph documents a tense scene during the panel’s questioning of Corey Lewandowski, Mr. Trump’s former campaign manager, who Democrats believe may hold a key to proving that the president obstructed justice. At issue is whether House rules allow a consultant working for the Democrats to directly question Mr. Lewandowski.

As Mr. Nadler leans back his chair, an intense debate unfolds around him even after he overruled Republicans’ objection to a prominent defense lawyer questioning Mr. Lewandowski, and then quickly dispatched with their attempts to shut down the hearing.

His broader goal is to try to methodically fight back opposition to build a case for the public that Mr. Trump obstructed justice, abused his power and profited from his office. As he sees it, Tuesday’s hearing, like others before it, may have been chaotic and given the witness a platform to blast Democrats, but it also allowed his committee to demonstrate before rolling television cameras that Mr. Trump had tried to obstruct the special counsel investigation, and is now working to thwart the committee’s own.

hand outstretched

Hunched over, thrusting a small sheaf of papers across the frame, Mr. Collins has initiated this particular fight, grinding the proceedings to a halt. In his hand is a copy of the contract for Barry H. Berke, an experienced white-collar defense lawyer, to serve as a consultant to the committee. Mr. Collins, a fast-talking conservative, is arguing that Mr. Berke is not a full committee employee, and therefore ineligible to question witnesses under the rules. But the redness in his face points to a more general grievance.

In this case, as in most other conflicts Republicans provoke over terms and rules, they want to portray Mr. Nadler and Democrats as running roughshod over congressional norms in a political campaign hellbent on destroying Mr. Trump. If they can help muddle the case Democrats are trying to build, all the better.

“Under the circumstances of the current so-called impeachment inquiry, it would constitute an unprecedented privatization of impeachment,” Mr. Collins said of Mr. Berke’s participation. He added, “If it’s win at all costs, Mr. Chairman, then we have a problem.”

Hand aloft, in a “Cool it” gesture

Ms. Lofgren is a crucial member of the committee’s brain trust. She served as a Democratic staff member for the panel during the impeachment investigation of President Richard M. Nixon and was a member herself when the committee voted to recommend impeaching President Bill Clinton.

This time, though, she has made no secret of her reservations about Democrats’ case and the wisdom of pursuing an impeachment strictly along partisan lines.

She also serves as the head of the House Administration Committee, and, as such, is stepping in as something of an arbiter to this rules dispute. As far as her committee is concerned, she said, it is well within the rules for Mr. Berke to ask questions.

at mr. nadler’s right hand

Mr. Berke is the subject of the particular fight playing out here. A partner at the New York firm Kramer Levin with strong connections to Democrats (he once represented Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York in a federal investigation into the mayor’s campaign fund-raising), Mr. Berke was hired by Mr. Nadler last winter to help the committee shape its investigative work. . Up until Tuesday, he had labored mostly behind the scenes. The stage was set for him to take a more prominent role last week when the committee approved new procedures governing its impeachment investigation including allowing for staff lawyers to question witnesses directly after lawmakers have had their turns.

Mr. Berke’s rapid-fire cross-examination of Mr. Lewandowski, when it finally commenced, drew widespread praise and highlighted just how choppy and unproductive the typical questioning by lawmakers in hearings like these can be. Most notably, Mr. Berke was able to force the hearing’s sharp-tongued witness to admit he had been less than truthful about his involvement with the special counsel in national television interviews.

“I have no obligation not to be dishonest to the media because they are as dishonest as anybody else,” Mr. Lewandowski said.

The supporting cast

A very small army of professional staff members stand behind elected officials in any congressional proceeding. In this case, a mix of Democratic and Republican aides who specialize in investigations and committee rules are advising the lawmakers on the finer points of their debate. Pressed against their chests or tightly rolled in their hands are legal papers and procedural documents that undergird the committee’s work. When they aren’t embroiled in mid-hearing flare-ups like this one, they help craft strategy, write speeches, draft scripts for questioning witnesses and attempt to keep the business of the committee on track.

Not pictured (but a looming presence)

As the Democrats’ leader, Ms. Pelosi overshadows the entire debate, quietly approving every move Mr. Nadler has made even as she tends to the tricky politics of impeachment in a party that is deeply divided over the issue. As the Judiciary Committee has intensified its talk of impeaching the president, Ms. Pelosi has maintained the skeptical stance she adopted months ago when she said doing so was “just not worth it.” Though she has not ruled it out entirely, she argues the House has not yet built a strong enough case, and must stay its current course of investigating and fighting the president in court.

The tensions between Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Nadler and the Judiciary Committee have increasingly spilled into public since Congress returned from summer recess last week. Though she has signed off on each of the panel’s actions, she has pointedly declined to use the phrase “impeachment investigation,” and in one private meeting last week, first reported by Politico, she took a thinly veiled swipe at the committee and its staff for pushing too aggressively on the process given that some Democrats are not yet sold on it, according to people familiar with her remarks. Supporters of impeachment fear she is trying to sow confusion to justify not going down that road.

Not pictured (but on the witness stand)

Try as Democrats might, they struggled at points on Tuesday to keep the focus on their witness and the story he had to tell about Mr. Trump’s attempts to enlist him in mid-2017 to drastically curtail the Russia investigation. Mr. Lewandowski, a pugnacious loyalist of Mr. Trump’s who is considering a Senate run in New Hampshire, was never going to make it easy. He dodged questions based on orders from the White House, taunted Democrats in the hearing room and, even as he confirmed key details about possible obstruction of justice, declared the president had never asked him to do a “anything illegal.”

Though Mr. Lewandowski is the first fact witness to show up for public testimony before the Judiciary panel, his blockade was part of a larger White House effort to stonewall the committee’s work. It has repeatedly intervened to direct former officials at the center of the case not to testify and slow-walked the production of documents, making it far more difficult for Democrats to create the kind of vivid hearings that could generate more public interest.

Impeachment Inquiry
Read more about House Democrats’ impeachment investigation
Lewandowski Tells Congress ‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal’

Sept. 17, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160966416_825fc6a9-3689-4a06-a7e4-fb6e42624f56-threeByTwoSmallAt2X This Picture Tells You Everything You Need to Know About Impeachment United States Politics and Government Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Democratic Party Collins, Douglas A (1966- )
House Judiciary Committee Inches Toward Impeachment

Sept. 12, 2019

Westlake Legal Group 12dc-impeach1-threeByTwoSmallAt2X This Picture Tells You Everything You Need to Know About Impeachment United States Politics and Government Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Democratic Party Collins, Douglas A (1966- )
Is It an Impeachment Inquiry or Not? Democrats Can’t Seem to Agree

Sept. 11, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160638207_a315e497-f3ef-4030-b3f4-f72b921903b3-threeByTwoSmallAt2X This Picture Tells You Everything You Need to Know About Impeachment United States Politics and Government Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Democratic Party Collins, Douglas A (1966- )

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Heartbreak: House Democratic Impeachment Caucus Is Dealt a Setback After Pelosi Smacks Them Down on Two Fronts

Westlake Legal Group NancyPelosiAPimage-620x317 Heartbreak: House Democratic Impeachment Caucus Is Dealt a Setback After Pelosi Smacks Them Down on Two Fronts washington D.C. Supreme Court SCOTUS Politics North Carolina Judicial impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Courts Congress California Brett Kavanaugh Allow Media Exception

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., speaks during her weekly media availability on Capitol Hill, Thursday, June 27, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Though the “bombshell” New York Times hit piece against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh has collapsed under the weight of its own deliberate omissions, that hasn’t stopped some impeachment-happy Democrats from demanding a formal impeachment inquiry.

But while the discredited report hasn’t prevented opportunistic Squad members and Democratic presidential candidates like Sen. Kamala Harris from hitting the gas on the Impeach Kavanaugh bus, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a giant red “STOP” sign in hand – and is already using it:

House Democratic leaders and rank-and-file members are dismissing calls to impeach Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, with some arguing the House has limited investigative resources and others saying it is a politically toxic issue.

Asked on Tuesday night if she sees the House spending any time on the Kavanaugh matter, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded with a simple “no.”

Pelosi didn’t elaborate, but other House Democrats boiled it down to fears a Kavanaugh impeachment show trial could hurt them in 2020:

Rep. Katie Hill, a California freshman, said she believes talk of impeachment could hurt Democrats on the campaign trail.
[…]
“… I know that this is not the issue that we want to be talking about just in terms of election,” she added. “I would like us to be able to just do what’s right, but I know that for many of my colleagues, it’s a really, really tough one.”
[…]
Pennsylvania Rep. Matt Cartwright also said his party should not prioritize the issue.

“Democrats are focused on the bread and butter, kitchen table issues facing ordinary Americans,” he told CNN.

Meanwhile, Politico reports on the “impeachment schism” that has grown between Pelosi and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler over the committee’s slow Trump impeachment waltz:

In a closed-door meeting last week, Speaker Nancy Pelosi stunned lawmakers and aides with a swipe at Democratic staff on the House Judiciary Committee.

Pelosi criticized the panel’s handling of impeachment in harsh terms, complaining committee aides have advanced the push for ousting President Donald Trump far beyond where the House Democratic Caucus stands. Democrats simply don’t have the votes on the floor to impeach Trump, Pelosi said.

“And you can feel free to leak this,” Pelosi added, according to multiple people in the room. Pelosi’s office declined to comment on the meeting.

Politico Playbook reported this morning that Democrats are far short of the votes they would need in the House to be able to impeach Trump. According to Democratic insiders they’ve talked to, 175 Democrats would vote today to impeach Trump if the issue came before the floor. That’s 43 short of the 218 needed.

So Pelosi is right to be concerned about how it would look for members if they tried and failed to impeach Trump in the middle of a crucial election cycle after months of Democrats like Nadler and AOC screaming “IMPEACH!”

They don’t have the votes now. They won’t have the votes later. Not for a Kavanaugh impeachment nor a Trump impeachment. Pelosi knows it.

(Hat tip: Ed Morrissey)

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Heartbreak: House Democratic Impeachment Caucus Is Dealt a Setback After Pelosi Smacks Them Down on Two Fronts appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group NancyPelosiAPimage-300x153 Heartbreak: House Democratic Impeachment Caucus Is Dealt a Setback After Pelosi Smacks Them Down on Two Fronts washington D.C. Supreme Court SCOTUS Politics North Carolina Judicial impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Courts Congress California Brett Kavanaugh Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Here’s one reason Rep. Nadler is eager to impeach President Trump

Westlake Legal Group Nadler-yelling Here’s one reason Rep. Nadler is eager to impeach President Trump The Blog primary challenge Jerry Nadler impeachment

If you watched the hearings featuring Corey Lewandowski yesterday then you’re already aware that Rep. Jerry Nadler is leading the Democrats’ charge to impeach President Trump. That drive has led to some behind-the-scenes conflict with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who has done her best to protect moderate Democrats who can point to internal polling which shows most voters don’t think impeachment should be a priority. Today, Politico reports Pelosi herself echoed those concerns last week:

In a closed-door meeting last week, Speaker Nancy Pelosi stunned lawmakers and aides with a swipe at Democratic staff on the House Judiciary Committee.

Pelosi criticized the panel’s handling of impeachment in harsh terms, complaining committee aides have advanced the push for ousting President Donald Trump far beyond where the House Democratic Caucus stands. Democrats simply don’t have the votes on the floor to impeach Trump, Pelosi said.

“And you can feel free to leak this,” Pelosi added, according to multiple people in the room. Pelosi’s office declined to comment on the meeting.

But despite the Speaker’s foot-dragging, Rep. Nadler continues to pursue Oversight hearings styled as impeachment investigations. It turns out there is a very practical reason for Rep. Nadler’s fixation on impeachment, one which helps to explain his willingness to court disaster for his moderate colleagues.

Several Democrats have speculated that Nadler’s hard line on impeachment is partly driven by concerns with his political standing on the left in his New York City district as he faces his toughest primary challenge in decades. Nadler has also come under intense pressure from Trump’s fiercest critics on the Judiciary Committee who have actively lobbied for impeachment for months.

The primary challenge in Nadler’s district comes from three different women who are partly by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ victory over Joseph Crowley. The leading challenger is Lindsey Boylan who has made Nadler’s reluctance to embrace impeachment the focus of her campaign. In July, Politico highlighted Boylan’s campaign:

While Nadler has pushed his party leadership behind the scenes to move on impeachment, Boylan is aiming squarely at Nadler’s reluctance to publicly support an official House inquiry against Trump — and she’s using the issue to great effect. The 35-year-old candidate took in $264,657 in donations in the second quarter of this year, the most among the growing crop of primary challengers looking to unseat members of Congress around New York City…

But the knock against Nadler — who will be a central character when Special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees on Wednesday — isn’t just about Medicare for All, the Green New Deal or immigration. It’s about the perception among some progressives that he isn’t thirsty enough for Trump’s blood…

“We need a leader, not a follower,” she said. “He’s trying to place the blame on someone else, Nancy Pelosi. I don’t think that is a way to lead.”

You can see two examples of Boylan’s focus on Nadler and impeachment in one of her ads below. But in addition to the heat coming from Boylan, Nadler has also been pressured by billionaire Tom Steyer who held an impeachment town hall in Nadler’s Manhattan district back in February:

Steyer’s Need to Impeach PAC held a town hall in Nadler’s Manhattan district Tuesday evening, and the group is running a 30-second television ad powered by a six-figure digital buy encouraging Nadler’s constituents to press him to back immediate impeachment…

“They voted for Congressman Nadler because they want some action,” he added. “That’s why they turned out.”

Of course, a primary challenge to Nadler, who has served in Congress since 1992, is still a long shot. But AOC showed that by running to the left, it can be done. Nadler may not admit it but he must be privately concerned that Boylan’s impeachment push could turn the 2020 election into a real challenge. But of course, he can blunt the impact of that challenge by becoming the face of the impeachment drive. That may not be good for House Democrats, especially the moderates who are being dragged along, but there’s no doubt it’s good for Jerry Nadler.

This first ad titled “Impeachment Now” was released in mid-July. The ad only has a handful of views on YouTube but the same clip received thousands of views when she shared it on Twitter.

Here’s another video Boylan released on Aug. 1:

The post Here’s one reason Rep. Nadler is eager to impeach President Trump appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group Nadler-yelling-300x153 Here’s one reason Rep. Nadler is eager to impeach President Trump The Blog primary challenge Jerry Nadler impeachment   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

I’ve Said Some Very Unkind Things About Corey Lewandowski and I Take Them All Back

Westlake Legal Group lewandowski-house-judiciary-committee-620x317 I’ve Said Some Very Unkind Things About Corey Lewandowski and I Take Them All Back Special Counsel republicans Politics New York New Hampshire Jerry Nadler impeachment House Judiciary Committee Front Page Stories Featured Story eric swalwell donald trump democrats Corey Lewandowski California Allow Media Exception

Corey Lewandowski, former campaign manager for President Donald Trump, references a copy of the Mueller Report that he requested to be brought to him, as he testifies to the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday, Sept. 17, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee as chaired by Fat Jerry Nadler was revealed to the world for the collection of lackwits that it is. The proximate cause of this revelation was Nadler’s insistence on obtaining televised testimony of former Trump aide and occasional campaign manager and New Hampshire senate candidate Corey Lewandowski. My colleague, Elizabeth Vaughn, has the full story in Lewandowski Trolls Lawmakers At House Judiciary Committee Hearing; Calls Eric Swalwell ‘President Swalwell’.

There were epic moments. We have Lewandowski calling Eric Swawell “Presidnent Swalwell.”

We have Mensa-reject, Sheila Jackson Lee referring to “Volume Eleven” of the Mueller Report”

And getting nothing at all from Lewandowski

Nadler refused to allow a GOP member any opportunity to question Lewandowski and gave a highly paid consultant and major Democrat donor thirty minutes.

All this blow-tried toad was able to elicit from Lewandowski was that he doesn’t feel under any obligation to tell the media the truth. [Insert “shocked face” emoji.]

Somehow this is a major revelation to the same people who pushed lie after lie upon the American people with the Russia Hoax.

In short, I doubt that there was ever a witness before any House committee who was more richly in contempt of the membership and the process than was Lewandowski. And it was only fair. Nadler and his fluffers have worked long and hard to reach the level of assclownishness they have achieved and they should not be deprived of their reward.

This morning, CNN had Lewandowski on to be interviewed by one of it dimmer bulbs (this, in a universe of talent that includes Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, and Brian Stelter is not much of a distinction), Alisyn Camerota. It went about as well as could have been expected given Camerota’s lack of talent.

The left seems to think that Camerota drew blood because Lewandowski says he never read the Mueller report, but this is the real blood being drawn. CNN is belaboring Lewandowski for lying to the media (I really don’t get why this is a revelation to sane people) while they employ a contributor who is facing indictment for making false statements to the DOJ IG. Not quite credible.

Yesterday he walked into a hostile hearing and left a Category 4 hurricane trail of wreckage behind him. He went on CNN this morning and gave a performance that will haunt Camerota’s dreams for a decade or so…I wouldn’t be surprised to encounter her at a PTSD clinic…or on Skid Row scoring crack.

During the 2015-2106 season, I said some bad things about Lewandowski. They were justified, mind you, but perhaps overly harsh. Based on his performance yesterday and today, I take them all back. I’ll even send some money to his Senate campaign.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post I’ve Said Some Very Unkind Things About Corey Lewandowski and I Take Them All Back appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group lewandowski-house-judiciary-committee-300x153 I’ve Said Some Very Unkind Things About Corey Lewandowski and I Take Them All Back Special Counsel republicans Politics New York New Hampshire Jerry Nadler impeachment House Judiciary Committee Front Page Stories Featured Story eric swalwell donald trump democrats Corey Lewandowski California Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Pelosi : No, we’re not wasting time on impeaching Kavanaugh

Westlake Legal Group nadler-pelosi Pelosi : No, we’re not wasting time on impeaching Kavanaugh The Blog Sheldon Whitehouse Nancy Pelosi Jerrold Nadler impeachment House Judiciary Committee House Democrats Dick Durbin Brett Kavanaugh

Perhaps Nancy Pelosi should consider opening up an Impeachment Denial Office on Capitol Hill, as her caucus seems determined to threaten it for pretty much anything. Several Democratic presidential candidates demanded the impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh over a badly reported smear job at the New York Times, and a few of Pelosi’s colleagues jumped on that bandwagon. By yesterday afternoon, however, the backfire was evident enough for Pelosi to put her foot down:

House Democratic leaders and rank-and-file members are dismissing calls to impeach Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, with some arguing the House has limited investigative resources and others saying it is a politically toxic issue.

Asked on Tuesday night if she sees the House spending any time on the Kavanaugh matter, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded with a simple “no.”

Momentum appears to have significantly shifted as the Times’ Kavanaugh reporting has fallen apart under scrutiny, and Democratic leadership has belatedly come to grips with it. The Senate’s number-two Democrat Dick Durbin lamented that his fellow Democrats seem obsessed with the idea of impeachment. He warned about the impression such “knee-jerk” reactions leaves with voters:

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the Senate minority whip and a member of the Judiciary Committee, said Republicans love hearing Democrats talk about impeachment and warned his party against an “unrealistic,” “knee-jerk reaction.”

“The notion of an impeachment, to me, is unrealistic and the fact that we would divert ourselves from other issues for that purpose makes no sense,” he said. “It’s become a knee-jerk reaction among many Democrats.”

Sheldon Whitehouse, last seen delving deeply into the etymology of the word “boof” and teenage slang for sex, lamented the jump to prosecution ahead of actual evidence:

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, warned that House Democrats pushing for impeachment were getting ahead of themselves.

“We seem to have a habit of wanting to get to the verdict before we’ve gathered the evidence. I don’t, as a former prosecutor, approve of that habit,” he said.

Hmmm. That’s quite the turnaround from Whitehouse’s conclusion-jumping about teenage entries in high-school yearbooks from 40 years ago. As a former prosecutor, has he finally figured out the difference between “boof” and “boff” yet in 1970s/1980s teen slang?

This sudden realization about the potential dangers of impeachment fever haven’t quite registered yet with one of its most significant sufferers. Politico reports that a schism has begun opening between Pelosi and House Judiciary chair Jerrold Nadler over his attempts to cast his inquiries as a formal impeachment process, a split which came out in the open at a private caucus meeting last week. Pelosi has grown so frustrated that she explicitly told members to leak it to the press:

In a closed-door meeting last week, Speaker Nancy Pelosi stunned lawmakers and aides with a swipe at Democratic staff on the House Judiciary Committee.

Pelosi criticized the panel’s handling of impeachment in harsh terms, complaining committee aides have advanced the push for ousting President Donald Trump far beyond where the House Democratic Caucus stands. Democrats simply don’t have the votes on the floor to impeach Trump, Pelosi said.

“And you can feel free to leak this,” Pelosi added, according to multiple people in the room. Pelosi’s office declined to comment on the meeting. …

Both Pelosi and Nadler, who have served in the House together for more than 25 years, insist their relationship remains strong. But their rift over impeachment is getting harder and harder to paper over amid Democrats’ flailing messaging on the topic and a growing divide in the caucus.

Pelosi’s smart enough to realize that the rhetorical stampede toward impeaching Kavanaugh over the weekend compromised the argument for impeaching Trump. As Durbin warned, Democrats now look like utter political nihilists, not good-government activists, attempting to oust anyone who opposes them regardless of elections or process. They have become a pitchfork and torch mob, not a governing party. The longer that goes on, the tougher it will be for them to hold the ground they gained in 2018 and avoid the same backlash Republicans got in 1998.

The post Pelosi : No, we’re not wasting time on impeaching Kavanaugh appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group nadler-pelosi-300x173 Pelosi : No, we’re not wasting time on impeaching Kavanaugh The Blog Sheldon Whitehouse Nancy Pelosi Jerrold Nadler impeachment House Judiciary Committee House Democrats Dick Durbin Brett Kavanaugh   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal,’ Lewandowski Says in Hearing

WASHINGTON — Corey Lewandowski, one of President Trump’s most loyal political confidants, confirmed in congressional testimony on Tuesday that the president had once asked him to help curtail the scope of the Russia investigation, possibly obstructing justice.

But under sharp questioning from Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee conducting an impeachment inquiry, Mr. Lewandowski refused to provide new details about his encounters with Mr. Trump beyond what the special counsel documented. And a combative Mr. Lewandowski, the president’s first campaign manager, insisted that Mr. Trump’s request did not amount to “anything illegal.”

The first in a series of hearings to determine whether the committee should recommend impeachment, the five-hour session brimmed with bitterness and drama. Democrats secured statements they needed from Mr. Lewandowski both confirming his role in Mr. Trump’s attempts to impede the Russia inquiry and vivifying investigators’ accounts with a witness on live television.

Yet the hearing underscored Democrats’ uphill battle as they seek to build a case for impeachment in the face of the entrenched opposition from the White House and potential witnesses. Mr. Lewandowski tried to slow-walk his answers, displayed an attitude of taunting obstinacy and obeyed the White House’s request that he not disclose any private details about his discussions with Mr. Trump. His evasions and occasional outright attacks infuriated Democrats.

Key Moments From Corey Lewandowski’s Testimony Before Congress

Sept. 17, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160966410_d26ee353-28ad-4457-aeda-57327340cffa-threeByTwoSmallAt2X ‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal,’ Lewandowski Says in Hearing United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Special Prosecutors (Independent Counsel) Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Ethics and Official Misconduct

Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York and the committee’s chairman, told Mr. Lewandowski near the hearing’s conclusion that the panel would consider holding him in contempt of Congress for his refusal to cooperate. But Mr. Nadler trained most of his ire on the White House, mentioning the possibility of drafting an article of impeachment based on its interference in the committee’s investigation.

“The pattern of obstruction laid out in the Mueller report has not stopped,” Mr. Nadler said. “You showed the American public in real time that the Trump administration will do anything and everything in its power to obstruct the work of the Congress.”

One Democrat on the judiciary panel, Representative Val B. Demings of Florida, wrote on Twitter during the hearing, “This president must be impeached.”

Democrats’ threats did little to change the reality in the hearing room. Mr. Lewandowski was flanked by two empty chairs meant to be filled by two former senior White House aides, Rick A. Dearborn and Rob Porter, whom the committee had subpoenaed. But late Monday, the White House directed both men not to appear, declaring that they were immune from congressional subpoenas.

Democrats have challenged that assertion in court with regard to another witness, the former White House counsel Donald F. McGahn II, but a ruling could take months, perhaps after the window closes to make an impeachment case before next year’s elections overtake Washington.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Democrats focused on trying to draw out details about how Mr. Trump asked Mr. Lewandowski to pressure the attorney general at the time, Jeff Sessions, to diminish the scope of the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

Democrats view the episode as an attempt to gut the inquiry, and Mr. Mueller’s investigators suggested that it provided sufficiently plausible evidence of criminal obstruction of justice to present to a grand jury.

As Mr. Mueller recounted, Mr. Trump met with Mr. Lewandowski in the Oval Office in mid-2017 and criticized Mr. Sessions for recusing himself from overseeing the Russia investigation.

The president asked Mr. Lewandowski, a private citizen who has never served in the administration, to deliver a message that Mr. Trump dictated on the spot. Mr. Sessions should give a speech announcing that Mr. Trump had been treated unfairly and that he would limit the scope of the special counsel investigation, the president said.

Mr. Lewandowski made some effort to follow through, setting up a meeting with Mr. Sessions and trying to enlist Mr. Dearborn, a former Sessions aide, in the task, but ultimately Mr. Lewandowski never conveyed the directive.

Democrats pounced on the strange situation as evidence that the president was illegally trying to interfere with the inquiry and hide his efforts to do so.

“Didn’t you think it was a little strange the president would sit down with you one-on-one and ask you to do something that you knew was against the law?” asked Representative Steve Cohen, Democrat of Tennessee. “Did that strike you as strange?”

Mr. Lewandowski curtly disagreed: “I didn’t think the president asked me to do anything illegal.”

ImageWestlake Legal Group merlin_160966476_763011d8-f4a6-4ed4-9978-f0dc6e09a25c-articleLarge ‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal,’ Lewandowski Says in Hearing United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Special Prosecutors (Independent Counsel) Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Ethics and Official Misconduct

“The White House is advancing a new and dangerous theory: the crony privilege,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler, the chairman of the committee.CreditDoug Mills/The New York Times

Pressed about other conversations he may have had with Mr. Trump or other advisers close to the president, Mr. Lewandowski repeatedly declined to answer.

“The White House has directed that I not disclose the substance of any discussion with the president or his advisers to protect executive branch confidentiality,” he said multiple times.

Mr. Lewandowski, who is considering a Senate run in New Hampshire, also used the hearing as an opportunity to promote his allegiance to Mr. Trump in a way that could benefit him politically.

“As for actual ‘collusion,’ or ‘conspiracy,’ there was none,” Mr. Lewandowski said during his opening remarks. “What there has been, however, is harassment of this president from the day he won the election.”

Much of his testimony appeared to be calculated to simply irritate or embarrass Democrats, robbing their proceedings of the gravity of impeachment. In his opening remarks, he took a swipe at Hillary Clinton and echoed the president’s apocalyptic and misleading language “about illegal immigrants pouring across our borders killing innocent Americans.”

During a break that he requested, Mr. Lewandowski tweeted a link to a website for a super PAC that was created Tuesday, Stand With Corey.

Mr. Trump, who watched the proceedings from Air Force One, cheered on Mr. Lewandowski. “Such a beautiful Opening Statement,” he wrote on Twitter. “Thank you Corey.”

Republicans derided Democrats’ investigation as a stunt.

“My majority made a promise: We’ll impeach him. We’ll investigate him. For most of them, it happened in November 2016 because they couldn’t believe that Donald Trump won,” said Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the panel. “And they still can’t get over it today. So what do we do? We have public hearings, lots of flashbulbs, embarrassing the president — not gathering facts, not investigating, not doing oversight.”

Democrats intend to stay the course, though divisions persist in their caucus over impeachment.

The Judiciary Committee is sitting on unused subpoenas that it could deploy in the coming weeks to compel testimony from a handful of the most prominent Trump administration figures connected to Mr. Mueller’s report. Those include John F. Kelly, the former White House chief of staff; Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser; Mr. Sessions; and Rod J. Rosenstein, the former deputy attorney general who appointed Mr. Mueller and oversaw his work.

Democrats will also try to broaden their inquiry to other accusations of corruption and malfeasance. On Tuesday, they announced a hearing for next week focused on whether Mr. Trump’s businesses have illegally profited from spending by foreign and domestic government spending in violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clauses.

The committee had also set a deadline Tuesday for homeland security officials to produce any relevant documents related to reported meetings in which Mr. Trump dangled pardons for any officials fearful that they might break the law by enforcing his policies at the border. It was not immediately clear whether the administration complied.

Maggie Haberman, Catie Edmondson and Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting.

Impeachment Inquiry
Read more about Mr. Lewandowski and Democrats’ impeachment investigation.
Key Moments From Corey Lewandowski’s Testimony Before Congress

Sept. 17, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160966410_d26ee353-28ad-4457-aeda-57327340cffa-threeByTwoSmallAt2X ‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal,’ Lewandowski Says in Hearing United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Special Prosecutors (Independent Counsel) Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Ethics and Official Misconduct
House Judiciary Committee Inches Toward Impeachment

Sept. 12, 2019

Westlake Legal Group 12dc-impeach1-threeByTwoSmallAt2X ‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal,’ Lewandowski Says in Hearing United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Special Prosecutors (Independent Counsel) Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Ethics and Official Misconduct
Impeachment Inquiry or Just Plain Oversight? It Depends on Whom You Ask

Sept. 13, 2019

Westlake Legal Group merlin_160673463_69a63484-72dc-463b-9efd-6a17f3438865-threeByTwoSmallAt2X ‘I Wasn’t Asked to Do Anything Illegal,’ Lewandowski Says in Hearing United States Politics and Government Trump, Donald J Special Prosecutors (Independent Counsel) Russian Interference in 2016 US Elections and Ties to Trump Associates Nadler, Jerrold Lewandowski, Corey (1975- ) impeachment House Committee on the Judiciary Ethics and Official Misconduct

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Ayanna Pressley Moves Forward With Kavanaugh Impeachment Effort, Even as Senior Senate Dems Balk at the Idea

Even though the “bombshell” New York Times report about an old-turned-new sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh has fallen apart under scrutiny, Squad member Ayanna Pressley has already launched an impeachment effort against the Supreme Court Justice.

Fox News reports:

Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., one of the four freshman congresswomen known collectively as the “Squad,” is planning Tuesday to introduce a resolution seeking an impeachment inquiry into Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, despite reluctance from top Democrats to pursue one and concerns about the basis for the latest accusations.

The resolution follows a New York Times report that included a new allegation of sexual misconduct from when Kavanaugh was in college — although an editors’ note later revealed that the alleged victim did not recall it taking place. In a statement, Pressley only focused on the women who came forward during Kavanaugh’s confirmation process.

Here’s what Boston.com journalist Nik DeCosta-Klipa reported from his Twitter account about Pressley’s move:

Unfortunately for Pressley, House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler is signaling the committee’s hands are too full laying the groundwork for impeaching President Trump to be able to immediately take up the Kavanaugh issue:

The House Judiciary Committee is too tied up with “impeaching the president” to take immediate action on a potential investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler said Monday.

“We have our hands full with impeaching the president right now and that’s going to take up our limited resources and time for a while,” Nadler said on WNYC when pressed by host Brian Lehrer.

Nadler said his first move to investigate Kavanaugh would come next month, when FBI Director Christopher Wray appears for a previously scheduled hearing that will now feature a significant focus on the Supreme Court justice’s past — and whether the FBI’s background check was thorough enough. Nadler said his panel’s primary focus would be determining whether Kavanaugh lied to the Senate.

Meanwhile, senior Senate Democrats are telling impeachment-hungry House and Senate members to “get real”:

So the demands by 2020 presidential contenders to remove the Supreme Court justice, on the heels of new reporting about allegations of sexual misconduct, are getting panned.

“Get real,” as Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) put it Monday afternoon.

“We’ve got to get beyond this ‘impeachment is the answer to every problem.’ It’s not realistic,” Durbin said. “If that’s how we are identified in Congress, as the impeachment Congress, we run the risk that people will feel we’re ignoring the issues that mean a lot to them as families.”

[…]

“Mitch McConnell would block any impeachment. So that’s a moot point,” said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), a former Judiciary chairman. He said the lesson to be learned is not to rush lifetime confirmations: “Don’t ever let those mistakes happen again.” Until Democrats take back the Senate, however, there’s little they can do to halt McConnell on nominations.

Who’s gonna break this news to struggling presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris?

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Ayanna Pressley Moves Forward With Kavanaugh Impeachment Effort, Even as Senior Senate Dems Balk at the Idea appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ayanna-pressley-300x200 Ayanna Pressley Moves Forward With Kavanaugh Impeachment Effort, Even as Senior Senate Dems Balk at the Idea washington D.C. The Squad Supreme Court Social Media Sexual Assault Allegations Sexual Assault SCOTUS Politics North Carolina Media Massachusetts kamala harris Jerry Nadler impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump Dick Durbin democrats Culture Courts Congress Brett Kavanaugh Ayanna Pressley Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com