Feingold asks for list of coaches

[mb7588a]

This is an important list. If those people told Alito how to answer questions about wiretapping etc, there could be trouble.

There is also the report of Sen. Lindsey Graham attending and coaching during the moot sessions.
http://villagevoice.com/news/index.php?issue=0602&page=roston&id=71634

[flpoljunkie]

1. Feingold is not questioning Alito on his views on the death penalty.

[Avalux]

2. Ed Gillespie was in charge of the whole thing.

He was interviewed on CNN (or one of those) and talked about helping Alito prepare for the hearing. He's not a Senator, but as head of the RNC, he's got his hands in the pie.

[flpoljunkie]

3. And old Ed Gillespie is the new treasurer of Senator George Allen's PAC.

What does that tell us? A lot.

[mb7588a]

4. that's a hell of an endorsement. :P nt.

[stonedpika]

6. And this is wrong because?

Do you suppose that if a Democrat president nominated a judge for SCOTUS the nominee would be coached by a Republican? Of course not, the people in his team will be from the party that nominated them!

Please let's not be naive...

[mb7588a]

8. Ed isn't the target of Feingold's question,

the justice dept. and white house lawyers, as well as fellow senators, are the target of this question.

[myrna minx]

9. I happen to believe that if members of the committee that

are questioning him on the nomination were actually helping coach him prior to the hearings would give the appearance of impropriety and unethical behavior.

Welcome to DU. :hi:

[tkmorris]

15. Yes everyone does it

So that means it's OK.........

I've heard this before somewhere.

[The Backlash Cometh]

19. The people who coached him may be facing criminal charges.

Charges, btw, which Alito may have to resolve at the Supreme Court level.

[snowbear]

20. Pika....

are you stoned? http://eliteleague.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/duh!.gif

[flpoljunkie]

22. Just pointing out Ed's newest job in the Republican party apparatus.

[Vickers]

24. You're trying SO hard, aren't you?

Let's not be naive, indeed!

Oh, and welcome to DU, yadda yadda yadda...

[flordehinojos]

17. ed gillespie ... he seems to cough at interesting points in alito's

testimony. i wonder if they have a sort of morse code going. one cough don't answer the question. two coughs obscure, obscure, obscure. three coughs you are treading on hot water. four coughs forget, forget, forget=no recollection. no recollection. no recollection.

}(

just like the rest of the bushiiters gillespie is an ***%%%####

[ginnyinWI]

23. aha--that's why he was sitting right behind Alito on day one

and maybe the other days too--don't know as I've been following it on XM radio since then.

[Oreo]

5. Kicked and nominated

Maybe this will be the basis of the filibuster... if this isn't a reason that is easy enough for the sheeple to comprehend I don't know what is.

I can't remember... what was Alito's response to Feingold's question about who coached him?

[mb7588a]

10. today he said he would provide a list of who helped him.

From Feingold's opening statement:
In 1990, when the judge appeared before this committee in connection with his nomination to the court of appeals, Judge Alito promised to recuse himself from cases involving a mutual fund company with which he had substantial investments, Vanguard. He kept those investments throughout his service the court of appeals and still has them today.

But, in 2002, he sat on a panel in a case involving Vanguard. Since his nomination to the Supreme Court, we have now heard different explanations from the nominee and his supporters about why he failed to do recuse himself.

Needless the say, the shifting explanations and justifications are somewhat troubling. I hope that we will get the full and final story in these hearings.

Before we grant lifetime tenure to federal judges, and particularly, justices of the Supreme Court, we must make sure that they have the highest ethical standards.

[mb7588a]

12. and yesterday's line of questioning:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/10/AR2006011001087.html

FEINGOLD: Well, Judge, aren't we going to be in kind of a tough spot if we find out the Supreme Court can't help us figure out whether the FISA law is an exclusive authority or not? Isn't that going to be hard to resolve between the executive and the Congress?

ALITO: Well, Senator, when I said in reference to Senator Leahy's question that often disputes between the two branches are resolved without resorting to the courts, I don't think I was referring specifically to this issue.

ALITO: And if I gave that impression, that was a false impression. I think what I meant to say and what I hope that I did say was that separation of powers disputes in general sometimes fall within this doctrine.

FEINGOLD: Noted a few times today that the questions of the president's power in the wiretapping area and other areas will likely come before the courts, including the Supreme Court. You just did that.

As I understand it, you've prepared for these hearings over the past few months with a variety of practice sessions. Some have called them moot courts or murder boards. Was the question of the president's power in time of war to take action contrary to a federal statute ever raised in any way during any of the practice sessions for these hearings?

ALITO: I have had practice sessions on a great variety of subjects, and I don't know whether that specific issue was brought up. It may have been. But what I can tell you...

FEINGOLD: You don't recall whether this issue...

ALITO: No, the issue of FISA certainly has been something that I have studied, and this is not -- FISA is not something that has come before me as a judge.

FEINGOLD: But you don't recall whether or not this was covered in the practice sessions?

ALITO: No, no, the specific question that you raised about the conflicts between the president's authority to say that a statute enacted by Congress should not be followed. But the general area of wiretapping and foreign intelligence surveillance, wiretapping...

(CROSSTALK)

FEINGOLD: ... the recent events that have led to this dispute...

ALITO: And the recent events.

FEINGOLD: ... and the possibility that it may come before you. Right, Judge?

ALITO: That's correct.

FEINGOLD: OK. Who was present at these practice sessions where these questions were discussed? And who gave you feedback or suggestions or made any comment whatsoever on the answers you gave?

ALITO: Nobody at these sessions or at any of the sessions that I had has ever told me what to say in response to any question.

FEINGOLD: I just asked -- were there no comments...

ALITO: The comments that I've received...

FEINGOLD: ... or no advice?

SPECTER: Let him answer the question, Senator Feingold.

ALITO: The advice that I've received has gone generally to familiarizing me with the format of this hearing, which is very different from the format of legal proceedings in which I've participated either as a judge or previously when I was arguing a legal issue as a lawyer.

But nobody has told me what to say. Everything that I've said is an expression of my own ideas.

FEINGOLD: And I don't question that, Judge. I asked you, though, whether anybody gave you any feedback or suggestions or made any comment whatsoever on the answers you gave in the practice sessions.

ALITO: In general? Yes, they've given me feedback, mostly about the form of the question, the form of the answers.

FEINGOLD: Have you received any other advice or suggestions directly or indirectly from anyone in the administration on how you should answer these questions?

ALITO: Not as to the substance of the question. No, Senator.

FEINGOLD: Only as to the style?

ALITO: That's correct; as to the format. Not as to what I should say I think about any of these questions. Absolutely not. I've been a judge for 15 years. And I've made up my own mind during all of that time.

FEINGOLD: Again, I'm not suggesting that.

ALITO: I just want to make that clear

FEINGOLD: I asking whether or not somebody talked about the possible legal bases that the president might assert with regard to the ability to do this wiretapping outside of the FISA statute. Was that kind of a discussion held?

ALITO: Nobody actually told me the bases that the president was asserting. I found the letter that was released last week or the week before by an assistant attorney general setting out arguments relating to this on the Internet myself and printed it out.

And I studied it to get some idea of some of the issues that might be involved here. And I looked at some other materials that legal scholars have put out on this issue. But nobody in the administration actually has briefed me on what the administration's position is with respect to this issue.

FEINGOLD: Does it strike you as being inappropriate for members of the Department of Justice or the White House staff who are currently defending the president's actions in the NSA domestic spying program to be giving you advice on how you might handle questions about that topic in the hearing?

ALITO: It would be very inappropriate for them to tell me what I should say. And I wouldn't have been receptive to that sort of advice. And I did not receive that kind of advice.

FEINGOLD: Thank you, Judge.

[rocktivity]

7. Coached?

(Does web search for 12/19/05 Time magazine article titled (Bush's) Search For A New Groove):

...White House strategists believe they have ended the slide in Bush's approval ratings, which lately have been topping 40% again. "It's time for the Bush comeback story!" one coached TIME for this article. "The perfect storm has receded. We have better news in Iraq, oil prices are down, and Katrina has kind of fallen off the radar screen in terms of public concern." But they know that...(t)he focus will soon shift to the 2006 midterm elections and then to...2008. And a midterm election that doesn't go the Republicans' way would draw a bright line of demarcation between a presidency and a lame-duck Administration...

Now I fully realize that "coached" is Time's choice of word. But presumably they chose it because they FELT they were being "coached"--which I find even MORE disturbing!

:headbang:
rocknation

[PretzelWarrior]

11. THIS IS FOR FILIBUSTER MATERIAL

they will keep asking that this document and that item and these witnesses be brought forward so we can see Dems stand up and say WE ARE FILIBUSTERING THIS RADICAL P.O.S.

I cannot stress enough how important it is you write to your Senators on this matter.

[mb7588a]

13. i think it's for hearing material, but later hearings

about wiretaps, not about Alito. Those people are witnesses to future hearings.

[wake.up.america]

16. Does anyone thinks Alito will Not sit as a Supreme Court Justice?....

Pretty sad.

[ekelly]

18. I don't know yet......

but I AM getting tired of this "let's bash the democrats" fest that's going on in this hearing.
All the Repubs are doing is bashing....they aren't really even asking Alito questions anymore.

This is supposed to be a hearing about Alito....not the Dem senate members behavior.

[mb7588a]

14. Vangaard is filibuster material

see this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2362683&mesg_id=2362683

[babylonsister]

21. Isn't coaching a standard operating procedure for

this kind of hearing?

[PretzelWarrior]

25. but if senators who are part of hearing coached....

that is not standard operating procedure, is it?

[babylonsister]

26. But is it deemed illegal; is there a statute that says that? It

sounds like bad form and is in bad taste, but what has this admin done that wasn't?

[robbedvoter]

27. Not by the one who ends up asking you the real question

These are supposed to be hearings, remember?

[AtomicKitten]

28. Since it's unethical for Judicial Committee members to coach the nominee,

Feingold is barking up the right tree. I love this guy.

[mb7588a]

29. Yeah he definitely is.

I wouldn't be surprised to see unanimous Dem. oppostion in the Judic. Committee.
I also wouldn't be surpirsed to see a couple support him.

[Jo March]

32. I called and left a message at his office yesterday

I asked the same thing! Did Graham coach Alito? If so, don't you think that Graham should recuse himself?

Go, Feingold!!

[wabeewoman]

35. Wouldn't this be good?

Could the dems force Graham to withhold his vote due to conflict of interest and prevent the nomination getting to the floor? I think Graham is making a mockery of the process by taking sides with this much involvement and not being at least impartial in appearance. Is this how it normally happens?

[Jo March]

36. To my knowledge, I thought that they had to be impartial

Of course, that's a naive thought, I'm sure.

It would be great to have Graham recuse himself. Alito would probably cry then!

[McCamy Taylor]

30. If the GOPers act like dicks, the Dems will fillibuster on principle.

The Dems certainly have a substantial list of reasons they can cite for fillibuster. And they need to differentiate Dem vs. Republican especially now when the GOP is trying so hard to portray Dems as GOP-lite in the Abramoff scandal.

[AX10]

31. I'd like to see the list too.

Was Lindsay Graham one of Alito's coaches?

[Chicago1]

33. Good for Senator Feingold.

I stood up and cheered when I heard him say that. He's WONDERFUL!!!!

Hopefully Scalito won't lie (Those republiCANTS NEVER EVER EVER LIE!!!)


START THE REVOLUTION!!!!!

[pstans]

34. Way to go Feingold!

http://www.russforpresident.com

[Jeffersons Ghost]

37. sick um russ

There's our go-to-guy for president!