Does The University of Illinois have a Problem
I’m not a lawyer. Also Republicans are worse than I imagine possible even taking into account the fact that they are worse than I imagine possible. However, I think Brett Kavanaugh defender Andrew Leipold of The U of Illinois School of Law is unfit to serve as a law professor.
The issue is that Kavanaugh signed the Starr report which argued that Clinton could be impeached for delaying his interview with special prosecutor Starr. Therefore, either Kavanaugh agrees that Trump should be impeached or he is a complete hypocrite and partisan hack (no prize for guessing which).
Leipold argues that people are not responsible for their signatures “I don’t think it’s a fair conclusion to draw that everyone’s name who appeared on the report agreed with everything written there,” Ah and what if it were an affidavit ?
Also “Our job was to emphasize the grounds for impeachment,” he added. “We’re not the decision maker; Congress is the decision maker.” I had the impression that a prosecutor’s job is to seek the truth and to attempt to make sure that justice is served. His saying that his job was to support a specifici conclusion is a a confession of prosecutorial misconduct.
Yet the University of Illinois pays him to teach students how to practice law.
I’m pretty sure tenure can’t be revoked for misconduct which preceeded the tenure decision. Telling the truth about how one is a hack is not moral turpitude. I don’t think there is anything to be done about the problem. But it is a problem.
On the other hand, judge Kavanaugh can certainly be asked whether he agrees that prosecutors are supposed to be biased against people they investigate, whether he knew of Leipold’s attitude at the time, and whether he tried to do anything to protect justice for Leipold.
I am hope that Kavanaugh can’t handle being under oath. He chose to lie the day his nomination was announced (saying no president nominating a justice had been more thorough than Trump). I think conservatives often have a problem in settings in which conservative and good are not treated as synonyms. Now he has been writing opinions for the DC circuit court and he has a Yale law degree, but I sure can hope.
“The issue is that Kavenough signed the Starr report which argued that Clinton could be impeached for delaying his interview with special prosecutor Starr. Therefore, either Kavenaugh agrees that Trump should be impeached or he is a complete hypocrite and partisan hack”.
This might be a good point but let’s work on getting his last name correct. If he signed it with the version you start this with – the weasel might just deny under oath that Kavenaugh signed it.
Thanks and sorry
‘Judge Kavanaugh, who after working for Mr. Starr served as an aide to President George W. Bush, has since expressed misgivings about the toll investigations take on presidents. In 2009, he wrote that Mr. Clinton should have been spared the investigation, at least while he was in office. Indicting a sitting president, he said, “would ill serve the public interest, especially in times of financial or national-security crisis.”’
Now THIS is why he is Trump’s boy! Funny – we did not hear this view back in 1998!
I don’t think people realize exactly what this guy(or another clone) on the Court means.
It means ther wil be no actual progressive programs made law(regardless of the control of the other two branches) until there are replacements on the Court.
In other words, not in my lifetime.
Correct as Jack D would tell you.
SCOTUS was never an easy venue to present in front of even with others besides Alito, Thomas, Roberts, etc. on it. 85 cases per year and you might be one of them if you have the money, the importance, and the right attorney representing you to be there. No more Giddeons will pass through its doors.
Bush41 had an agenda – pack the court with Federalist justices. He did his part with Thomas. Bush Jr. did his part with Alito and Roberts.
Of course Clinton gave us Breyers and Ginsberg but we see those it is Bernie or nobody types complaining about Clinton. Obama gave us 2 very good justices and he should have appointed a third.
Of course letting McConnell rule the Senate and now have the Dumpster as President has led to the Federalist takeover. Of course the Bernie or nobody crowd somehow blames Hillary Clinton.
In my experience, liberals ALSO have trouble anywhere that “liberal” and “good” are not treated as synonymous–such and when they claim that a serial sexual predator president should not have been impeached for the sole reason that he was a Democrat.
a serial sexual predator president? Harvey Weinstein used to be our President. Look, I have an issue with what Bill Clinton did but to call him a predator simply because you are a Ken Starr fan demeans the “me too” movement.
” . . . when they claim that a serial sexual predator president should not have been impeached for the sole reason that he was a Democrat.”
I’ve never heard anyone make that claim.
Now I know plenty of Democrats who think the current sexual predator president, who is a Republican, should be impeached. There may be some who think he shouldn’t, though. Perhaps you’re confused about party affiliation?
“Now I know plenty of Democrats who think the current sexual predator president”.
Clinton cheated on his wife a few times. Trump is a well known serial adulterer. Of course Mueller is not investigating that. He is investigating what may amount to treason among other things. Of course Dick Cheney committed treason in the outing of Valerie Plame. And Cheney paid no price for that at all.
Adultery by a Democrat – impeach him. Treason by a Republican – put him on Mount Rushmore!
I think you are all missing the big picture. While fighting about liberal vs conservative ideas including racism, xenophobia, abortion, privacy, LGBTU issues etc, income inequality has steadily increased since 1970 and we have marched steadily toward an oligarchy like Russia. This has been true with Republican and Democratic presidents and majorities in Congress. The one constant has been the Supreme Court which since the early 70’s has vacillated between a rightest and center right majority. Kennedy may have authored the same sex marriage opinion and voted to uphold a watered down version of Roe vs Wade, but at the end of the day he was a reliable vote for the 1% and against working people and that will be Kavanaugh’s legacy too–just like Gorsuch. The Supreme Court has been bought and paid for by the rich and at the end of the day, it matters not a whit who is president or who controls Congress except in maintaining the wealthy’s hold over the courts.
It does matter who controls Congress and much more than the Presidency or SCOTUS. Congress can legislate around either. This too is why the Popular Vote to elect a president is little more than a joke. Fix the Hose and return it to what was written in Article 1 of the Constitution.
The 1% have been mostly right of center too.
Illinois, university and all, has a massive pension problem. That will force realignment, right-sizing, hand-wringing and many other aerobic activities as the numerous sins of omission and commission ooze their ways into the collective consciousness and bond ratings.
During Judge Kavenaugh’s stint with the Starr investigation, President Clinton was required by the Supreme Court to give a deposition in a civil case charging sexual harassment and that testimony was the basis for the House’s impeachment; he was charged with perjury. To say one has to leave the President alone while he is in office is really rank hypocrisy. Of course he’s not saying the current law prevents indictment and/or investigation of the President; he argued that Congress should pass a statute requiring that or so it was reported in what I saw.