Official Alito Hearing Thread – Day 4 – Thread 6

[Sydnie]

Thread 1

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2363798#2363911

Thread 2

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=117538&mesg_id=117538

Thread 3

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=117932&mesg_id=117932

Thread 4

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=118486&mesg_id=118486

Thread 5

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x118933

[Sydnie]

1. Getting this ready for after the break n/t

[Sydnie]

3. Ohhh.. Graham made NO comment at all this time

interesting.

[CottonBear]

10. Cornyn doesn't have any either. Specter says exec. session before lunch

(to keep it short) because if after it would go on...but they have nothing in particular to discuss. RIGHT. :(

[CottonBear]

4. They're going into executive session. Will not say why. Before Lunch.

Graham and Cornyn have no comments and they are going into executive session to discuss any Q. about Alito in private...

[Sydnie]

7. Open meeting laws require that they state a purpose

general questions is a hedgey reason to call for ES.

[Surya Gayatri]

13. Specter just said it has been a precedent

since some past confirmation hearing. "I don't know why we do it, but we do." Apparently to bring up any sensitive questions behind closed doors. SG

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. Specter has called for a committee vote on Jan 17. They DO have a vote

in the committee.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/01/09/supremecourt/main1192324.shtml


Specter, R-Pa., said he expected to wrap up the hearings this week and has called for a committee vote by Jan. 17.

[Sydnie]

5. Executive session - interesting

they are going to nail Graham, I can't wait until they have to release those minutes!

[Skidmore]

8. What happened. I keep missing the good parts today.

[Sydnie]

12. The repugs are giving back their time for today

and they are going into ES to discuss any quedstions they may have about him.

Now, there is not much about this man that they haven't discussed in public, so what is the need for closed doors?

[FreedomAngel82]

44. Very interesting

Do they always do this??

[CottonBear]

16. Executive session shortly but no specific reason according to Spector...

Sessions and Alito gave each other BJs.

Wife smirked and smiled and grimaced.

Graham and Cornyn had no final comments.

Alito would not answer anything.

[LSK]

9. not really, they always do that

Usually to review national security background checks and other related stuff.

[Sydnie]

14. That would have made sense - why not give that as a reason?

They have to give a reason.

[LSK]

20. he said it yesterday, not sure why he said it like that today

But they always do that.

[radio4progressives]

100. Do they have to release minutes of Executive Sessions?

I hope so!

[hlthe2b]

33. yes, see #30. They have a committe vote, but goes to full vote

regardless of committee recommendation/outcome on SC nominations.

[hang a left]

6. DEMOCRATS UNLIKELY TO FILIBUSTER ALITO,

DEMOCRATS UNLIKELY TO FILIBUSTER ALITO,
SENATE AIDES SAY... DEVELOPING...

www.rawstory.com

[LSK]

11. whatever

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!!!!!!!!!

Do they have ANY clue what they are doing?

[LSK]

19. WAIT AND SEE

Stop kneejerking to rawstory. The people who brought you Fitzmas for 2 weeks.

[hang a left]

28. Please....save it....really

Doesn't mean that they won't. That is just what is being telegraphed

[gkhouston]

53. I wouldn't put it past Reid to telegraph compliance

while planning defiance.

[sasha031]

23. why are we even paying attention

if they don't filibuster we are F#*cked!

[hlthe2b]

30. clarification in_cog_ni_to

I tried to respond to your earlier reply to me, but that thread was already closed. So, let me do a bit of correction here...

re my comment that SC nominations do not get a committee vote but rather the nomination automatically goes to the full floorI think what is probably the case and what I should have stated more clearly is that they do get a committee vote, but regardless of the committee outcome, it still will go to the full chamber for full vote. I heard this discussed on both a radio (NPR?) and tv show this week (Lehrer, I think), so I'm relaying my understanding from what I heard). But in light of the comment re: scheduling a vote, I believe the distinction is simply that the committee concurrence isn't needed on SC nominees to go to a full floor vote).

[in_cog_ni_to]

36. AH! I see. Thanks so much for explaining that!

:hi:

Then WTF is the committee for if it doesn't matter how they vote? That makes NO SENSE to me.

[hlthe2b]

41. just a gauge of support, I guess before it goes to the full Senate

:shrug:

I guesss we shall see...

[radio4progressives]

102. this is correct - unlike bills which can languish or die in committee

the sc nominee goes to the full senate.

what I'm unclear on is if that isn't the case with all presidential appointments (?) lower court appointments, etc..

[stocksthatgoup]

54. Democrat Leadership Strategy

When unwanted babies pile up on doorsteps, when young women are dying in the streets because of botched abortions, when Grandma is sleeping on the street, when starving children are begging for food at every shopping center, then the US public will beg for Democrats to lead again.

[radio4progressives]

104. except they will be "disappeared" in neo gestapo style...

and the right wing media won't report it...

so no one will even know about it.

[sasha031]

17. oh my gawd

they have to!!!!!

[LSK]

18. questioned for 18 hours - not one question from Republicans

:rofl:

[CottonBear]

22. But, but...he was SO forthcoming and honest and had so much stamina...

:sarcasm:

[FreedomAngel82]

45. And he juggles too!!

[Surya Gayatri]

26. Compared to the 30+ year

job he's about to get, I'd say 18 hours of questioning is a pretty fair exchange. SG

[underpants]

21. Now the wait to see the white smoke begins

tick tock tick tock

[CottonBear]

delete

[CottonBear]

25. Phone lines open...how long until Chappaquiddik comes up? n/t

[underpants]

31. It will make Mrs.Alito cry

ad making that battle ax shed a tear is saying something. Only someone ;-) like Lindsey Graham could make that happen

[wordpix]

55. hahahah, LOL

[babylonsister]

24. Does anyone have a clue how Specter might vote? nt

[in_cog_ni_to]

27. He'll vote for him. I can't believe a stem cell research question

wasn't asked/ He'll vote for him.

[FreedomAngel82]

46. And what is interesting about that

is he's apart of a group called Republican Majority or whatever and it's against overturning Roe v Wade. So he'd be nothing more than a hypocrite and I hope whomever votes for Alito gets kicked out of the group.

[Sydnie]

29. Specter will allow it to go to the full Senate

How he votes there will be telling though.

[BR_Parkway]

32. Executive session is to review FBI background check, standard

procedure

[sasha031]

34. I JUST CALLED KENNEDY'S OFFICE!

Fienstein is the turncoat, she is the one who will not support a filibuster!

[Sydnie]

35. Is that what they told you? If so, we need our CA people to

make some calls.

[sasha031]

37. YES, THEY WERE VERY HELPFUL

SHE WON'T SUPPORT IT, SHE IS A TURNCOAT, SHE GOT HERS THE HELL WITH EVERYONE ELSE!

[Sydnie]

39. You should put up a post in GD and in the CA forum calling for action

Let them know what Kennedy's office said.

[Surya Gayatri]

38. Yes, get those

California women on the phone--gather outside her offices in San Francisco. Run her to ground, hound her. She's got too many ties to Corp. interests and war profiteering (through her husband) for her constituents' good. Damn her! SG

Edited: Time to make her understand who she represents--and that she won't represent them much longer if she behaves like this.

[in_cog_ni_to]

40. THAT FUCKING WENCH!

Can she be voted out of office? Will this finally do her in?

They only need 41 to filibuster. They don't need DIFI IF Collins, Snowe and Chaffee join the filibuster, right?

[in_cog_ni_to]

42. THAT'S why she said what she said on CNN

about "they have no reason to filibuster ScAlito." WENCH!

I wish I lived in Ca. I'd be on her doorstep until she changed her damn mind. What the hell is wrong with that woman?

[Surya Gayatri]

43. Here are her offices, get on the phone!

Washington D.C
Hart Office Building
Room 331
Washington, D.C. 20510
[phone]

San Francisco
One Post Street,
Suite 2450
San Francisco CA 94104
[phone]

Los Angeles
11111 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 915
LA, CA 90025
[phone]


San Diego
750 "B" Street,
Suite 1030
San Diego, CA 92101
[phone]

Fresno
1130 "O" Street,
Suite 2446
Fresno, CA 93721
[phone]

Edited: Or better yet, send snail-mail. It's always more effective. SG

[stocksthatgoup]

50. No Fillibuster

Seems the MSM is buying the Alito dance. They feel the Dems have pushed too hard. In fact many here believe the Dem Senators haven't attacked enough!

[sasha031]

57. I am afraid our MSM is totally corrupt

[radio4progressives]

105. The Snail Mail Will Not Be Received Until It's Too Late ...

Snail Mail is very important, and it should be sent in ADDITION to today's action which is to make sure the Senators are called, emailed and Faxed.

[rockymountaindem]

48. That leaves 43 Democrats

Nelson (NE) probably won't support a fillibuster, and then there's Lieberman, and Feingold, who often votes to support Presidential nominees. That's 40. That's all we need.

[Sydnie]

49. That's too close for comfort

Gotta work on those three swing voters. We need a buffer there.

[stocksthatgoup]

51. Herb Kohl -WI

Kohl voted for Roberts! Does anyone know how he will flop this time?

[0007]

89. Leahy did also!

[stocksthatgoup]

52. Herb Kohl -WI

Kohl voted for Roberts! Does anyone know how he will flop this time?

[sasha031]

60. anyone who has Chaffee, Snow, Collins

any blue states

[Pacifist Patriot]

96. Nelson (FL) is unlikely as well. I can't imagine him stepping...

up to the plate on this. I hope he proves me wrong.

[nickinSTL]

101. Feingold seemed to be asking some fairly tough questions, though

maybe he won't vote in favor this time?

[radio4progressives]

106. Feingold will NOT vote in favor of this Nominee... NT

[sasha031]

47. wait till the courts flip everything we have ever known and held dear

and go back to the 6th century, will the masses wake up then!

[wordpix]

56. Dem Senators, Wake up and Filibuster or Herr Bush will

totally take over and you'll have no say about his next war he wants to start to enrich himself and buddies.

[gumby]

58. no

We The People have become the frog in the pot, slowly boiling.

I think of the younger women in my family who "don't do politics" and deride me of doing so. I think of them and wonder how many of their friends and even children they will watch die or be seriously harmed in the back alleys. I wonder if they will 'do politics' then?

[sasha031]

59. the frog in the pot, slowly boiling. / ahh Gore Vidal

we are now in He process of losing our Republic


I know how you feel, that is why I spend so much time here, the people of my past are blind,

it's easier for them I suppose, if you can call being a fool easy.

[Sydnie]

73. Or how many may not reach their full potential because

they find themselves "stuck" in a life they never wanted.

"Frog in the pot" is just about dead on target.

[CornField]

61. Looks like they are coming back now

[Sydnie]

62. You going to be here for this?

I have to leave for work and someone needs to start the new threads. You up for the job? Please?

[CornField]

64. I'll be by the computer until 2:45, then I have to leave for a meeting

I'll help out as long as I can.

[sasha031]

63. yes

[sasha031]

65. this is all bullshit

ABA guess they are all right wingers too,

[sasha031]

66. how do we start a new thread

[Sydnie]

68. I can start a new one now if you want but

I have to leave for work soon, some one will need to take over. I got called in to do some work even though I didn't have anything scheduled for today. I have stayed here to start the threads (and listen to this too), but I need to go really soon.

If you start a new thread, just add the link back to the previous threads in the first post, so others can find it.

I keep the links in a text file. Makes it easier to add all at once that way.

edited to add - we usually start a new one at around 100 posts. Some dial ups start to lag if they get longer than that. Once you get a new thread open, ask the mods to lock the old one to keep the discussion going in one place.

[sasha031]

69. you have been terrific Sydnie

[Sydnie]

70. Your call for phone calls was terrific!

Heck, I just opened threads and snarked in them. :) My Senators are Kerry and Kennedy. I can save my dime from calls to them.

[sasha031]

74. we are neighbors

we are fortunate, we have real Dem's...these fake Dem's in Repukes clothing are a disgrace.

[Sydnie]

77. Why, yes we are!

We are very lucky.

You gonna do the new threads now? I really have to get out of here. LOL

[sasha031]

81. I will try Sydnie

not super on pc, will try

[Sydnie]

84. You'll do just fine!

If you need help, just holler. Someone will be there to help you.

Thanks! See you later then. :hi:

[sasha031]

90. have a good night in work my friend

:hi:

[leftstreet]

67. closed session background check - everything "in order"

Specter.

Now ABA members talking about how great Alito is.

[tedzbear]

72. ABA is made up of corporate lawyers...

This is to be expected.

[sasha031]

79. yep no Atticus Finch,

in this bunch of charlatans

[hang a left]

71. I will ask again...

Does anyone have a list of Democratic witnesses? Who are we putting on the stand??

[Sydnie]

76. I don't. I haven't seen a list of witnesses at all, either side. n/t

[Sammy Pepys]

78. here you go

PANEL I

1) Stephen L. Tober, Esq.

Chairman

American Bar Association

Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary

Portsmouth, NH

2) Marna Tucker

D.C. Circuit Representative

American Bar Association

Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary

Washington, DC

3) John Payton

Federal Circuit Representative

American Bar Association

Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary

Washington, DC


PANEL II

1) The Honorable Edward R. Becker

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge (Senior)

Philadelphia, PA

2) The Honorable Anthony J. Scirica

Chief Judge

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Philadelphia, PA

3) The Honorable Maryanne Trump Barry

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge

Philadelphia, PA

4) The Honorable Ruggero J. Aldisert

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge (Senior)

Philadelphia, PA

5) The Honorable Leonard I. Garth

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge (Senior)

Chicago, IL

6) The Honorable John J. Gibbons

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge (Retired)

Director

Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione

Newark, NJ

7) The Honorable Timothy K. Lewis

U.S. Court of Appeals Judge (Retired)

Counsel

Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP

Washington, DC


PANEL III

1) Edna Ball Alexrod

Attorney at Law

Law Offices of Edna Ball Alexlrod

South Orange, NJ

2) Michael J. Gerhardt

The Samuel Ashe Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law

University of North Carolina School of Law

Chapel Hill, NC

3) Peter Kirsanow

Commissioner

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Partner

Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan and Aronoff LLP

Cleveland, OH

4) Samuel Issacharoff

The Bonnie and Richard Reiss Professor of Constitutional Law

New York University School of Law

New York, NY

5) Carter Phillips

Managing Partner

Sidley Austin LLP

Washington, DC

6) Goodwin Liu

Assistant Professor of Law

University of California

Berkeley, CA


PANEL IV

1) Nora Demleitner

Professor of Law

Hofstra University School of Law

Hempstead, NY

2) Erwin Chemerinsky

The Alston & Bird Professor of Law

Professor of Political Science

Duke University Law School

Durham, NC

3) Anthony Kronman

The Sterling Professor of Law

Yale Law School

former Dean of Yale Law School

New Haven, CT

4) Beth Nolan

Partner

Crowell & Moring LLP’s Litigation Group

Counsel to the President 1999 - 2001

Washington, DC

5) The Honorable Charles Fried

Former Solicitor General of the United States

Beneficial Professor of Law

Harvard Law School

Cambridge, MA

6) Laurence H. Tribe

Carl M. Loeb University Professor

Harvard Law School

Cambridge, MA


PANEL V

1) Fred Gray

Senior Partner

Gray, Langford, Sapp, McGowan, Gray & Nathanson

Tuskeegee, AL

2) Kate Michelman

Former President

National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) Pro-Choice America

Washington, DC

3) Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr.

Associate Clinical Professor of Law and

Supervising Attorney

New Haven, CT

4) Amanda Frost

Assistant Professor of Law

American University Washington College of Law

American University

Washington, DC

5) John G. S. Flym

Retired Professor of Law

Northeastern University School of Law

Boston, MA


PANEL VI

1)Kate Pringle

Partner

Friedman, Kaplan, Seiler and Adelman LLP

New York, NY

2) The Honorable Charles A. Gonzalez

United States Representative (D-TX, 20th District)

The Honorable Debbie Wasserman Schultz

United States Representative (D-FL, 20th District)

3) Jack White

Associate

Kirkland and Ellis LLP

San Francisco, CA

4) Reginald M. Turner, Jr.

President

National Bar Association

Washington, DC

5) Theodore Shaw

President

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund

Washington, DC

[Sydnie]

80. thank you Sammy

and Welcome to DU! :hi:

[Sammy Pepys]

83. thanks!

Lurked for a while, then signed up the other day after following the Alito threads here. Glad to be here!

[hang a left]

82. Wow....that is a long list

Thanks

[Sammy Pepys]

86. I numbered some of them wrong too

That's both sides, mind you...not just the Dems.

It looks like the Dem witnesses come up in the "second half"...but I have no idea where the "second half" starts.

Also, my numbering in an attempt to make it easier read screwed up...note two House Dems will testify as well.

[hang a left]

85. I forgot my manners...

Welcome to DU :hi:

[Sammy Pepys]

88. hahah..thanks!

:hi:

[CornField]

75. It was inconclusive that some groups of people

received benefit from Judge Alito's ruling. Stated by ABA

[Sydnie]

87. sasha031 will be your new thread starter - I have to leave for work

Thanks sasha031!

[hang a left]

91. thanks Sydnie!!!

you done good!!

[CornField]

92. Why would he put this on his resume at a time when everyone knew

what this organization was? Did you ask him why he proudly put this on his resume?

Answer: We did not ask him why he proudly listed it, but we did ask him why he listed it.

Alito evidently gave the ABA the same Blah-Blah-Blah he gave to the judiciary committee

[Surya Gayatri]

93. Yes, apparently

the same excuse word for word. He'd obviously been very well prepped.

[sasha031]

95. can you guys help, I tried and screwed up

I tried but it didn't come out

as far i know what I did was post all previous and applied a new thread, put it in gen. but it didn't come out

[CornField]

97. It's there

here's a direct link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x121017

[Surya Gayatri]

99. Sorry sasha, I'm

an IT ignoramous. I'm of no help whatsoever!
HELP HELP HELP SOS SOS SOS HELP HELP HELP
Is there anybody in here who can come to the rescue????

[Pacifist Patriot]

94. Quick, someone catch me up. I had to leave right as Feingold started.

I've been gone for three hours and I just about went into C-SPAN withdrawal. Any highlights I can get without wading through threads? Sorry, I'm so lazy. Just spent two hours in a park with umpteen screaming children.

[babylonsister]

98. Do Dems get to call members of organizations opposed to

Alito, and interview them?

[CornField]

103. New Thread Open

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=121017&mesg_id=121017