Skip to main content

tv   U.S. Senate Senate Judiciary Chair Grassley on Supreme Court Nominee Brett...  CSPAN  July 31, 2018 8:21pm-8:44pm EDT

8:21 pm
recess. it's difficult to get through and a lot of conservatives in the house don't like the bill and they're not sure about the votes for that but it comes back to the house in a package with defense i think the thinking is it much easier to get them finished and sent to the president. >> as we approach some septembee deadline we will keep watching it on twitter and your handle -- you are reporting at bloomberg. thank you so much for joining us you thank you. >> senate judiciary chair chuck grassley spoke about something court nominee brett kavanaugh and responded to democrats for request for records. his remarks on the senate floor are 20 >> over the last several days the minority leader has again continued his unprecedented
8:22 pm
partisan interference with the business of the senate judiciary committee. in additiondd to these partisan interventions being unwelcome many of the minority leaders are surgeons just plain false. other assertions omit significant context so, as i've done several times here in recent days, i'm here to correct the record. let me start by reiterating the confirmation process for judge kavanaugh will be the most transparent in the history and that is from the availability of all the documents that are out there for our colleagues to study about this nominee. senators already have access to the most important part of judge kavanaugh's record and it's more
8:23 pm
than 300 opinions written during his 12 years on the dc circuit. in addition to the hundreds more opinions he joined in the more than 6000 pages submitted in connection with his senate judicial questionnaire. moreover, the senate will receive more pages of executive branch documents and the senate received for any supreme court nominee ever. i anticipate up to one million pages of documents from judge kavanaugh's time in the white house counsel's office and his service on the independent counsel's office along with records related to his 2006 confirmation to be a judge on
8:24 pm
the dc circuit. the production could be larger than the last five supreme court nominees combined. hence, you understand why i'm saying this will be the most transparent confirmation process of any federal supreme court justice. the other side is pretending like the most expensive entrance. confirmation process in history is not good enough. despite this expensive entrance. confirmation process, and senators already have judge kavanaugh's entire judicial record in front of them already, democratic leaders continue to make unreasonable demands for
8:25 pm
more and more documents. in fact, they demand access to every e-mail and every other document ever written or enreceived by every staffer who ever worked in the bush white house. they want these records to fish for documents that merely mention that merely mention, brett kavanaugh's name. in other words, they essentially want access to every document that ever went through the bush white house. now, this is really beyond unreasonable. it's not a very serious propos proposal. during judge kagan's confirmation then german lady was adamant that documents
8:26 pm
mentioning justice kagan's name should not be produced. this is just one example of democratic leaders not following the kagan standard. the motive behind the unreasonable demands for documents is obvious. democratic leaders want to stall judge kavanaugh's confirmation anyway possible. they hope to bury the senate and mountains of irrelevant documents to delay his confirmation hearing and perhaps deny him a vote during this current congress. the ranking members hometown newspaper reported this game over the weekend and the headline read something using the words stall. the san francisco chronicle called it holding, a tactic that
8:27 pm
could postpone a decision until after the midterm elections. the article explained that, and i quote again, the democratic strategy is to demand to see every document that crossed cavanaugh's desk while he served as part president george w. bush is -- secretary from 2003-2006. in other words the democratic leaders are demanding these documents in order to needlessly delay the process rather than for legitimate purposes. but these tactics aren't going to work. let me address some of the minority leaders specific
8:28 pm
points. he says that traditionally the senate judiciary committee sends a bipartisan letter requesting documents and he said that we should have sent out this letter to weeks ago. what the minority leader fails to point out is that my staff worked extensively with the ranking member staff to attempt to identify specific staff secretary records that might be of some interest to the democrats. but the democratic staff was not interested in a reasonable compromise, including my attempts to get them even more documents than the up to 1 million pages of documents that were already in the process of receiving. after multiple rounds of negotiation the ranking member
8:29 pm
staff still have not punched from their position that they are entitled to access to access any millions and millions of pages of documents that ever went through the bush white house. these demands were unprecedent unprecedented, or unreasonable and were obviously intended to delay the confirmation process. i cannot allow this tactic to further delay this important business of the committee so i went to a records request for the white house counsel documents as chairman because we need to keep this process movi moving. we can be stalling. it's unfortunate that the ranking member did not agree to sign it because the letter requested documents that both sidess agreed we should have.
8:30 pm
both sides agreed with the documents that were in my letter but no signature from the minority. then the minority leader, senator schumer, also says that we should have followed the president established during justice kagan's nomination. in suggesting this point he is rewriting history and he may not know that but he is. he conveniently forgets that both democrats and republicans agreed that we should not repeat documents and we shouldn't request documents from justice kagan's time as solicitor general. everyone agreed that the kagan security solicitor general documents were too sensitive for disclosure and in fact, could
8:31 pm
kill candidness of internal deliberations for future presidents in the consult and solicitor general. this same respect for confidential and confidentiality should reply with greater force than to staff secretary documents which includes some of the most sensitive policy advice going directly to a president. in this case, president george w. bush. indeed, the white house staff secretary, is essentially the inbox in outbox for the president of the united states. now, that's not to say that is not a very important position but it does not get involved in much policy in the senate current task force is to
8:32 pm
evaluate the qualifications for judge kavanaugh, not to relitigate every political and policy disagreement from president george w. bush's eight years in the white house. as my democratic colleagues keep pointing out judge kavanaugh has described how his time as staff secretary was a formative experience for him. well, justice kagan said the same thing about her time as solicitor general but in the case of justice kagan the democrats refused to request for records.le on top of the undisputed relevance of solicitor general's material judge kagan, however, backed by judicial record. in other words, unlike the more than 300 opinions that judge
8:33 pm
kavanaugh altered and the hundreds more opinions he joined in his 12 years of service on the dc circuit justice kagan had zero judicial opinions that she offered, zero judicial opinions that she joined and zero years of judicial service. her solicitor general documents for their for even more relevant democratic leaders are rewriting the kagan standard to further their stalling tactics. the minority leader also tried to draw a parallel or parallels with the request for documents from justice sotomayor's time as a board member of the puerto rican legal defense and
8:34 pm
education fund. this, however, was a narrow request closely tailored to a specific need for information but it resulted in the production of 100 documents, not millions of documents that are involved in the white house staff secretary and in contrast, democratic leaders demand access access to every single one of the millions and millions of pages of e-mails and other records from every one of the hundred dollars who served in the white house with judge kavanaugh. as i have said repeatedly, i will not put the american taxpayers on the hook for a senate democrats fishing expedition. clearly, losing on theum substantive arguments the minority leader has even
8:35 pm
resorted and personally attacking mr. bill berg, president george w. bush's attorney. mr. burke has been one of president bush'sid resonated representatives for the presidential records act going t back to 2009 and he is a leading partner in one of america's most respected and i think most liberal firms. i am told that he has insisted that no lawyer be selected to participate in the review of president bush's white house papers on the basis of his or her party affiliation or political ideology. moreover mr. burke has taken the time to personally meet with the ranking member staff an answer all of their questions about the document review process that i
8:36 pm
am describing to you here. the minority leader said today the press comes today that the review by president bush's lawyers quote, would not be so bad if we also got a full set of documents from the archives. well, that is exactly what i expect to happen. in other words, a full set of documents from the archives. president bush has offered to give us access to copies of documents that we requested from the archivist so that we on the committee who quickly begin our review of judge kavanaugh's record while the archives works through our document requests. the minority leader could have learned this by simply having a conversation with me instead of
8:37 pm
putting on a political show in front of tv cameras earlier today. i must also address the minority leaders unprecedented intervention into the business of the judiciary committee. the minority leader is not a member of that committee. we are not going to let him run the committee. i'm chairman of the committeett and he has no business inserting himself into the committee's business including the manner in which the committee will obtain the documents needed to review judge kavanaugh's record. last week he sent a letter to president george w. bush asking him to release all records from judge kavanaugh service in the white house while, at the same time, criticizing the way the president bush is chosen to review those records. this letter was an inappropriate e attempt to meddle in the committee's business and i am
8:38 pm
disappointed that my democratic colleagues on the committee are tolerating that sort of intervention. i have also learned that the minority leaders called the archivist in monday and asked them to quote, do the right thing with regard to the documents. i was disappointed to hear the minority leader was attempting to pressure the government official one appointed by president obama, can you believe? with regard to the committee's business. i also want to argue address the argument that my carly on the judiciary committee, senior senator from illinois has made. a colleague believes judge kavanaugh misled the committee during his 2006, missionary when he said he was not involved in developing the bush administration's detention and interrogation policies. the senior senator pointed to a
8:39 pm
media report that described a 2002 meeting in the white house of which judge kavanaugh advised whether his former boss justice kennedy was except a legal argument about american citizens saccess to counsel. these allegations have no merit and here's why. offering advice on the potential success of a legal position digested by others meaning others in the white house staff kateri does not show involvement in developing detention and interrogation policies. multiple sources have confirmed that judge kavanaugh was not involved in developing detention and interrogation policies. moreover these allegations were
8:40 pm
ready to be referred to the department of justice which concluded that they did not even warrant opening an investigation. i will further point out that this 2002 meeting occurred while judge kavanaugh was in the white house counsel office and, as i have explained, the entires senate or at least the entire judiciary pretty will have access to judge kavanaugh's white house counsel records. in short i am proud to preside over what will be the most cotransparent preparation proces in history. as they have said publicly democratic leaders are firmly opposed to judge kavanaugh's confirmation and they have also had said they will do whatever it takes to defeat judge kavanaugh. they would like to bury the senate in a mountain of
8:41 pm
irrelevant documents to delay the confirmation process, as long as possible. as you can tell from my remarks today and my remarks three or four times since judge kavanaugh was appointed i'm not going to allow the minority to abuse the process. i yield the floor. >> c-span's washington journal live every day with news about the issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, the manhattan institute orrin hatch will join us to talk about the workforce. we talk about democratic socialism. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. eastern. during the discussion. >> for the night on q&a,
8:42 pm
congressional historians -- >> one of the questions i hear people asking all the time is this the most uncivil time in history? >> could be close if you picked another. and what about the years leading to the civil war -- [inaudible] >> there are a lot of senators who cheered on that post, remember? >> there is now a musical about alexander hamilton who was shot by sitting vice president of the united states. we've had terrible political times. >> one brawl in 1858 before the civil war that had 80 members rolling on the floor and fighting one another. >> one of the members who had a wig was named one of the members
8:43 pm
pull his weight after the fight and someone else yelled he scalped them. [laughter] that was enough levity to stop the fight. >> congressional historians richard baker, donald ritchie and ray smock sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. >> the aspen institute hosted a series of discussions about amateur athletes in college sports, including this one about whether college athletes to be paying a salary. the panel includes former georgetown men's basketball coach john thompson, constance at that director, the commissioner of the atlantic ten conference and nba player, nine no space, the challenge that ncaa band for student athletes. this is two hours. >> hello everyone. i'm executive director of the aspen institute.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on