Democrats Continue To Oppose Conservative Judges

---

POLITICS / DEMOCRAT'S CONTINUE CORRUPTION AGENDA: NOMINATE ONLY THOSE LIBERAL JUDGES WHO WILL UNCONSTITUTIONALLY LEGISLATE FROM THE BENCH

---

This Is What Liberal Democrats Call "Change."

Senate Democrats, of course, are complaining that the president is reneging on his “promise” of bipartisanship made in a post-election speech last Wednesday. But they have not a shred of credibility on this point. Liberals in the Senate have turned the judicial confirmation process on its head, obstructing the president’s judicial nominees for political reasons. They even resorted to launching judicial filibusters, ignoring the constitutional directive to provide up-or-down votes on all judicial nominees. Why? Not because the nominees were unqualified. But rather because they didn’t like the nominees’ philosophy of judicial restraint. (Many liberals only like judges who will legislate from the bench.)

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

Bush Re-Nominates Conservative Judges

This week the president sent a signal to Capitol Hill that he is only willing to go so far in the “spirit of cooperation” with Senate Democrats. This according to the San Jose Mercury News: “On Wednesday the White House indicated that it will renominate six candidates during the lame duck session who have not earlier received a Senate floor vote because of Democratic opposition.”

Senate Democrats, of course, are complaining that the president is reneging on his “promise” of bipartisanship made in a post-election speech last Wednesday. But they have not a shred of credibility on this point. Liberals in the Senate have turned the judicial confirmation process on its head, obstructing the president’s judicial nominees for political reasons. They even resorted to launching judicial filibusters, ignoring the constitutional directive to provide up-or-down votes on all judicial nominees. Why? Not because the nominees were unqualified. But rather because they didn’t like the nominees’ philosophy of judicial restraint. (Many liberals only like judges who will legislate from the bench.)

Republicans in the Senate made matters worse by folding in the face of Democratic resistance. Remember the so-called “Gang of 14” moderates in the Senate? Seven Republicans broke ranks and brokered a deal with seven Democrats to allow a few of the president’s judicial nominees through, while leaving open the possibility of future judicial filibusters. This compromise struck a fatal blow to the president’s attempts to push some key conservative nominees through by undermining any leverage the Republicans held in being the majority party. (Check out an op-ed I wrote last summer on the subject, Senate Abandons Judicial Nominees.)

The president should be congratulated for standing by his conservative judicial nominees. Unfortunately, no one -- not even the president, I’m sure -- expects these nominees to receive an up-or-down vote before the end of this lameduck session. And in January, when Democrats gain control of the Senate, what incentive will they have to fairly treat judicial nominees?

Republicans in the Senate had an opportunity to confirm conservative judges to the bench, and they blinked. Conservative candidates had an opportunity to educate voters on the importance of the “judge issue” in the last election cycle, but they did not. We must look no further than the recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision on gay marriage to see the price we will pay for these failures.

Thomas Fitton

President

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts, click here.

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

---

Harry Reid's Democrat ''Culture Of Corruption''

---

POLITICS / HARRY REID'S DEMOCRAT "CULTURE OF CORRUPTION"

---

Reid, who recently came under fire for failing to properly report a $700,000 land deal, allegedly accepted more than $30,000 of Abramoff-tainted money in return for his “cooperation” in matters related Nevada Indian gaming. The Nevada senator vehemently denies any wrong-doing, but according to an ABC News online report, Abramoff reportedly told investigators the contributions “were no accident and, in fact, were requested by Reid.”

The Democrats, and the liberal media, would have you believe Abramoff was a Republican-only problem, but Reid’s alleged involvement suggests Abramoff played both sides of the aisle. In fact, according to ABC news, Abramoff has allegedly pointed the figure at "six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators."

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

Abramoff Finally Behind Bars

Soon-To-Be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) Allegedly Accepted More Than $30,000 Of Abramoff-Tainted Money, Failed To Report A $700,000 Land Deal.

Former lobbyist Jack Abramoff is finally behind bars. On November 15, Abramoff reported to a federal prison in Maryland to begin his 5-year, ten-month sentence for defrauding banks of $23 million in Florida in 2000. This, of course, far from closes the book on Abramoff and his congressional co-conspirators. He remains at the center of a massive public corruption investigation by the Department of Justice that, in the end, could involve as many as a dozen members of congress.

The web of influence peddling scandals involving Abramoff has already claimed more than a few politicians. First, former Republican Majority Leader Tom Delay resigned earlier this year rather than face Abramoff questions at election time. You also may recall that Ohio Republican Congressman Bob Ney resigned in early November, three weeks after pleading guilty for his role in an Abramoff-related scandal. Ney was the first Abramoff-connected Congressman to be convicted of a crime in the Abramoff matter. He may not be the last. Reports suggest Abramoff has been cooperating with authorities and naming names, including soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).

Reid, who recently came under fire for failing to properly report a $700,000 land deal, allegedly accepted more than $30,000 of Abramoff-tainted money in return for his “cooperation” in matters related Nevada Indian gaming. The Nevada senator vehemently denies any wrong-doing, but according to an ABC News online report, Abramoff reportedly told investigators the contributions “were no accident and, in fact, were requested by Reid.”

The Democrats, and the liberal media, would have you believe Abramoff was a Republican-only problem, but Reid’s alleged involvement suggests Abramoff played both sides of the aisle. In fact, according to ABC news, Abramoff has allegedly pointed the figure at "six to eight seriously corrupt Democratic senators."

Abramoff, who hobnobbed at the highest levels of government while living lavishly, will have to work in food service and similar jobs that pay anywhere from 12 to 40 cents an hour. His federal inmate number is 27593-112. It is good to know that sometimes crime doesn’t pay.

Thomas Fitton

President

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts, click here.

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

---

Pelosi's Democrat ''Culture Of Corruption''

---

POLITICS / PELOSI'S DEMOCRAT "CULTURE OF CORRUPTION"

---

Pelosi’s initial decisions as House Speaker call to question her commitment to rooting out corruption in Congress. In addition to backing Hastings, Pelosi’s first choice for House Majority Leader was Iraq war critic Frank Murtha, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1980 “Abscam” scandal, which led to the conviction of five House members for bribery and conspiracy. Murtha ultimately lost his bid for leadership to Maryland Congressman Steny Hoyer earlier this week. In light of her bluster about corruption, Pelosi has been rightly criticized for throwing her lot in with the ethically-suspect Murtha. The more things change …

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

JW To Pelosi: Hastings Unfit For Leadership Position

On November 15, I sent a letter to Nancy Pelosi, urging the House Speaker to reject Florida Democratic Rep. Alcee Hastings for the chairmanship of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. According to a number of press reports, Hastings is Pelosi’s choice to assume the chairmanship when the new Congress convenes in January.

For Speaker Pelosi, who has been an outspoken critic of what she has mislabeled “the Republican culture of corruption” on Capitol Hill, Hastings is a terrible choice for this sensitive leadership post. As I noted in my letter, Hastings is one of only six federal judges to be removed from office through impeachment and has accumulated “staggering liabilities” ranging from $2,130,006 to $7,350,000.

Here’s an excerpt from my letter. (You can read it in its entirety by clicking here.)

“Any ordinary citizen with Rep. Hastings’ demonstrated record of lack of integrity, ethical misdeeds and financial problems would be denied a security clearance. Respectfully, you should not put our nation’s security at risk by placing Rep. Hastings at the head of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

“That (Hastings) was elected to Congress simply does not mean he meets the high standards that might entitle him to committee leadership posts, let alone ‘select’ committee posts that concern highly secret national security information. I am confident there are other members of your caucus who could serve as head of the Committee.”

Some background on Hastings: On August 3, 1988, the House of Representatives adopted articles of impeachment against then-Judge Hastings. After a trial, he was convicted by the Senate and removed from office on October 20, 1989, for perjury and conspiracy to obtain a bribe. As The Washington Post reported in 1989, the Senate found that Hastings “engaged in the bribery conspiracy and repeatedly lied under oath at his [criminal] trial and forged letters in order to win acquittal.”

Moreover, according to his most recent financial disclosure statements, Hastings indicated that he has no more than $15,000 in assets … while listing millions of dollars in liabilities in the form of legal fees.

Pelosi’s initial decisions as House Speaker call to question her commitment to rooting out corruption in Congress. In addition to backing Hastings, Pelosi’s first choice for House Majority Leader was Iraq war critic Frank Murtha, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1980 “Abscam” scandal, which led to the conviction of five House members for bribery and conspiracy. Murtha ultimately lost his bid for leadership to Maryland Congressman Steny Hoyer earlier this week. In light of her bluster about corruption, Pelosi has been rightly criticized for throwing her lot in with the ethically-suspect Murtha. The more things change …

Thomas Fitton

President

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts, click here.

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

---