Donald Trump’s nomination of Brett Kavanaugh is falling apart by the hour – partly because Trump and his people rather obviously didn’t bother to do any real vetting of Kavanaugh while they were racing to try to hurry up and get him confirmed. The latest stunning revelation about Brett Kavanaugh is that he lied to the Senate in 2006. You don’t have to take our word for it, because a prominent Senator is the one making the accusation.
Kavanaugh went through Senate confirmation hearings to become a federal judge in 2006. Then in 2007, Democratic Senator Dick Durbin learned that Kavanaugh had lied during those hearings. He sought to get answers, but Kavanaugh stonewalled him. Now that Trump has put Kavanaugh under the microscope by nominating him for the Supreme Court, Durbin is going for the jugular.
Here’s what Senator Durbin tweeted today: “In 2007 I sent Brett Kavanaugh this letter asking to explain his inaccurate and misleading testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. I’m still waiting for an answer.” Of course, “inaccurate and misleading” is a fancy way of saying that Kavanaugh lied under oath – which is also known as perjury. Durbin included a copy of his detailed original 2007 letter to Durbin, which spells out the precise moment at which Kavanaugh lied about his knowledge of the Bush White House’s detention and torture of enemy combatants. So where does this get us?
Senate Democrats don’t have the votes to stop the Brett Kavanaugh nomination on their own. So they’re taking a number of different approaches for trying to convince the American public to push back against the nomination so ferociously, it collapses to the point that the GOP Senate majority can’t carry it all the way to confirmation. But the fact that Kavanaugh lied under oath the last time he was nominated for a judge position? That’s an incredibly powerful argument for turning the tide against any judicial nominee – particularly a Supreme Court nominee.
Bill Palmer is the publisher of the political news outlet Palmer Report