Jerrold Nadler will be the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when the new congress takes its seats in 2019. He promised, after Kavanaugh was rushed on to the Supreme Court, after displaying a two-year old’s judicial temperament and playing fast and loose with the truth, skating on the edge of perjury with clumsy but effective evasions and other lawyerly dodges, to drag the character-challenged Justice before the judiciary committee for some follow-up questions about his arguably borderline perjury.
I am pretty much out of the letter writing business these days, but I will write to Nadler and remind him of the importance of holding a rash, clearly partisan political hack, now a lifetime member of our highest court, accountable for his behavior during the confirmation process, see if his testimony crossed the line into perjury and take appropriate action to get him off the High Court if he did. This process is a necessary corrective to provocative partisan abuse of the political system. There will be much joy in America, among the 60% or so who do not uncritically support everything the current extremist administration is doing, if Kavanaugh is forced back into his former job, or no job.
There was nothing the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee could do during the Kavanaugh confirmation circus, they simply didn’t have the votes. There was nothing the Senators who opposed Kavanaugh could do when he came up for an up or down vote — the president and Mitch McConnell were shoving the most gracelessly aggressive right wing zealot they could find down American’s throat, 51-49, fair is fair, there wasn’t enough evidence produced at his hearing to convict him in a court of law so he’s cool, his character as a fighter, no matter how ugly it may look to the liberals, is good, democracy in action. USA! USA!!!!
But there is an impeachment process for federal judges, including ones who willfully and knowingly lie during their confirmation hearings. There is a process to determine whether they lied under oath or not. Let’s get on with the process, Jerry.
I will include this succulent detail in my letter to him, from the authors of LikeWars, a recent book about the weaponization of social media. It certainly points out that there was a coordinated effort to support the lying candidate, a right wing conspiracy, if you will, to cover the lying hack’s vulnerable hindquarters. A link to the full interview is below. The pertinent section for Nadler and his committee is this:
The same thing played out during the Kavanaugh hearing where he used a term in his – a high school yearbook that was a sexual term. And during his hearing, he says no, no, no. It’s not a sexual term. It’s about a drinking game. The problem for him is that there’s literally no evidence on the entire Internet of that being a drinking game until someone within the House of Representatives – again, everything is out in the open so we can geolocate it to that.
During the middle of the hearing, someone in the House of Representatives goes to create the evidence on Wikipedia to make it seem as if he is telling the truth. So you have this back-and-forth, back-and-forth. And it’s our contention that every single political debate moving forward is going to see these kind of tactics utilized again because both sides not only use them but believe that they were the key to their effort, including in winning.
A quick gorgle search reveals that Nadler, and millions of other Americans, already know all about this. Here is USA Today on the subject.