Kavanaugh confirmation is not 'normal,' Klobuchar says, claiming too many documents withheld

Shouldn't the reading of the documents be a decision Congress makes? Heck, when our files go before a board, it would be nice to decide which stuff went up there, right? But, knowing the whole story is important for us... And for them, so the papers should be made available.

This endless document demand is meant to delay the hearings until after the mid-term election. Dems what a talking point for their upcoming debates.

LTJG Richard Bruce - Isn't that exactly what McConnell did by saying the "next President should decide" who gets into the SCOTUS when he blocked Obama from deciding? Is one better than the other?

Major difference. Last vacancy occurred with less than an year remaining in Pres. Obama's term. Republicans were following the SOP of Sen Biden in delaying such a late appointment. The Scalia vacancy had little impact on Court's proceedings. The longest Supreme Court vacancy lasted 391 days. Pres. Trump has over 850 days left in office.

MAJ Bryan Zeski - It appears the Supreme Court disagrees with you. The Supreme Court addressed "executive privilege" in United States v. Nixon, the 1974 case involving the demand by Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox that President Richard Nixon produce the audiotapes of conversations he and his colleagues had in the Oval Office of the White House in connection with criminal charges being brought against members of the Nixon Administration. Nixon invoked the privilege and refused to produce any records.

The Supreme Court DID NOT REJECT THE CLAIM OUT OF HAND [emphasis mine]; it noted, in fact,

"the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties" and that "[h]uman experience teaches that those who expect public dissemination of their remarks may well temper candor with a concern for appearances and for their own interests to the detriment of the decision making process."

This is very similar to the logic that the Court had used in establishing an "executive immunity" defense for high office-holders charged with violating citizens' constitutional rights in the course of performing their duties. The Supreme Court stated: "To read the Article II powers of the President as providing an absolute privilege as against a subpoena essential to enforcement of criminal statutes on no more than a generalized claim of the public interest in confidentiality of nonmilitary and nondiplomatic discussions would upset the constitutional balance of 'a workable government' and gravely impair the role of the courts under Article III." Because Nixon had asserted only a generalized need for confidentiality, the Court held that the larger public interest in obtaining the truth in the context of a criminal prosecution took precedence.

"Once executive privilege is asserted, coequal branches of the Government are set on a collision course. The Judiciary is forced into the difficult task of balancing the need for information in a judicial proceeding and the Executive's Article II prerogatives. This inquiry places courts in the awkward position of evaluating the Executive's claims of confidentiality and autonomy, and pushes to the fore difficult questions of separation of powers and checks and balances. These 'occasion[s] for constitutional confrontation between the two branches' are likely to be avoided whenever possible. United States v. Nixon, supra, at 692."

Maj John Bell - I understand executive privilege and its purpose, but if 1/4 of your "official business" are not fit for public consumption, maybe you aren't really in service to the people.

MAJ Bryan Zeski - Sir you and I both know the deal weather we see the same political way or not. Trump is someone who will think outside the box, as long as it benefits him. He proves that every day when he takes personal credit for everything single handedly. There is no "I" in "team" there is a "T" in Trump. He follows his own "traditions" and there is no checks and balances to make him see the light he refuses to see.

Kavenaugh needs to be looked at closely, but I do not want to see him hammered in a manner that when it's looked at again, we find that other "great minds" did the exact same way to someone else while poking at this man. It's happened already with immigration, and the hypocrisy needs to end. We had the "Biden Rule" and that was overlooked until we had the "McConnell Rule" where former actions came back to bite, and when they did, it was twice as hard at the wrong damn time. We're at the wrong time Pt2, and cannot afford to get this wrong again. I'm amazed Ginsberg is still there, but for how long? I think she's only holding in there due to her dislike of how the rule of law is being interpreted by this administration and see's herself as a last ditch check and balance of the system. If we get four more years of Trump, God sincerely bless her and all she's done, but can she outlast him and those who think like him?

MAJ Bryan Zeski - This is not a poke, but a clarifying question; are you asserting that judge Kavanaugh is the author of those 100,000 documents? That is not my read, but perhaps I am mistaken.

"According to the letter, most of those documents withheld are about “deliberations and CANDID [emphasis mine] advice concerning the selection and nomination of judicial candidates, the confidentiality of which is critical to any president’s ability to carry out this core executive function.” The rest include documents that include advice to Bush, communications among staffers about communications with Bush, and discussion of executive orders or legislation he was considering.

"...not fit for public consumption..." is your characterization, Are you asserting that there is something nefarious in those documents. In the SCOTUS ruling, the ruling made it quite clear that criminal activity negates any claims of executive privilege. Senator Klobuchar is charged with casting her vote; not you, not me. According to a quote in the article she has seen those documents.

“They’ve exerted their executive power — 148,000 documents that I’ve seen, that you cannot see, because they won’t allow us to make them public. So I can’t even tell you about them right now on this show.”

Senator Klobuchar, having knowledge of what is in those documents, I would fully expect that to be part and parcel of her decision how to cast her vote, but that does not over ride the SCOTUS recognized principle "...the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties."

There is not a lot of mystery about this Judge and his legal thought, he has considerably more written decisions than most judges. Those decisions are part of the public record, that NO ONE needs permission to access. As a SCOTUS Justice, he will not be anyone's adviser.