Kagan Turns Out To Be Incestuous

She has been an Inside the whole time.

Hey folks,

Turns out that Kagan is not just some Judge that Obama read some back round, reviewed some cases, and thought "Hey, maybe SHE would be a good choice." No. She has been there the whole time. Started out with the Clintons. How much? What was her involvement in the whole Lawsuit that lead up to the Impeachment? What was her involvement in White Water? Well, they will not tell us.

According to the AP - Kagan role in Clinton sex harassment suit withheld By Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writer – Fri Jun 11, 5:29 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Bill Clinton's presidential library won't publicly release memos and notes Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan wrote about the sexual harassment lawsuit that triggered Clinton's impeachment.

Kagan was involved in defending Clinton in the lawsuit brought by ex-Arkansas state worker Paula Jones, according to documents released Friday. Clinton's testimony for the Jones lawsuit, denying a sexual relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, led to his impeachment.

Why?

The library held back several of Kagan's memos to Clinton's top advisers in the case, saying that publicly releasing them would divulge confidential advice. They were turned over to the Senate Judiciary Committee that will hold hearings on Kagan's nomination, however.

It's clear from files that were made public that Kagan had a hand in the Jones case. In a September 1996 memo, Kagan writes that she's been in touch with other lawyers on a brief in the Jones lawsuit and, "I am happy with the direction they seem to be taking."

Earlier that year, she forwards to colleagues a brief written by then-Solicitor General Walter Dellinger supporting Clinton's bid to postpone the civil trial until after he had left office.

"It's really pretty good," Kagan says of Dellinger's brief. She notes approvingly that the brief "downplays" the question of whether the president should have immunity for conduct before he took office, and instead focuses on the argument that the case should be delayed because it would disrupt the performance of Clinton's duties as chief executive.

The White House said Kagan, who didn't focus on litigation matters, played only a tangential role in both the Jones case and the Whitewater investigation of Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton's financial dealings.

So why all the secrecy? Why not just release them?

"Kagan's work focused principally on providing legal advice to the policy and legislative staff," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. Her "work on Whitewater and Paula Jones involved reviewing legal pleadings, assisting in response to document requests, and offering legal research on short-term projects."

Clinton could have chosen to keep the records off-limits entirely, Earnest said, but instead gave them to the Senate panel "in the interest of transparency."

The papers are part of a roughly 40,000-page cache of records released Friday, most related to Kagan's stint in the White House counsel's office in 1995 and 1996.

Clinton settled the Jones case before trial. Although the House impeached him on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, the Senate rejected both counts.

But then again, how many Illinois people are in the White House? These people are ALL Incestuous. It should be no surprise that Kagan is already one of the Crew.
Peter

Sources:
AP - Kagan role in Clinton sex harassment suit withheld

Sotomayor Lying, Yet Will Be Confirmed

This is just a show.

Hey folks,

That's right. The Libs are doing what they do best. Congress is doing what they do best. They are putting on a pointless show. In the end, President Obama and the LWL {Left Wing Loons} will get what they want, Sotomayor will be confirmed. It doesn't matter that she is outright lying and completely making stuff up during these hearings. She is the chosen one, by THE chosen one.

Here is just a few examples that point out what I'm talking about. The Ricci case? Probably one of the biggest problems for her? No problem. She just lied about it. The Ricci {The Firefighters case that was just overturned} was decided on summary judgement. They didn't even publish the opinion. She claims? "the Ricci case was decided on precedent." But there is none. She can not even site the precedent. One of the reasons it was overturned. But that doesn't matter to those questioning and soon to confirm her.

When asked if she though empathy was something a Judge should rely on, if she shared Obama's view of a judge relying on what is in their heart, she said no.

"I wouldn't approach the issue of judging in the way the president does. Judges can't rely on what's in their heart. They don't determine the law. Congress makes the laws. The job of a judge is to apply the law."

REALLY?




The other "big issue?" Her Racial Remark?

She called the remark "a rhetorical flourish that fell flat."

"It was bad because it left an impression that I believed that life experiences commanded a result in a case, but that's clearly not what I do as a judge."

That's NOT what she said. She SAID THIS.

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

There is no way to take that out of context. There is no way to say it meant something different than what it means. She tried though.

“I want to say up front, unequivocally and without doubt, I do not believe that any ethnic racial or gender group has an advantage in sound judging. I do believe that every person has an equal opportunity to be a good and wise judge regardless of their background or life experience.”

But she said the exact opposite.

"a wise Latina woman" NOT ANY wise Judge, "with the richness of her experiences" NOT REGARDLESS of life experiences, "would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male" NOT equal. BETTER.

She kept going back to "look at my record." 65 percent turn over rate? She is wrong 65 percent of the time on the law. But then again, she thinks that Judges DO make policy from the bench.

What about her association with La Raza? According the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the NCLR, which bills itself as the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S. La Raze means "The Race." Will anyone question her about them? Did you know that La Raza has connections to groups that advocate the separation of several southwestern states from the rest of America? Does she believe in that?

But again. None of this matters. Again this is nothing but a show. Even Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said he could end up voting for her. But the problem is more and more Americans are realizing who and what Sotomayor is. I told you who and what she is long before most were even saying she was a possible choice. It's true, check the archives. But since a lot of VOTERS are learning the truth about her, they HAVE to put on this show. We were tough. We questioned her for two days, So on and so forth. But at the end of the day Obama wants, Obama gets.

Peter

Sources:
The Hearings
Sotomayor herself.