Monday, January 9, 2017

Sessions And Other 'Despicables' Need to Be Properly Vetted This Week - NO Rushing Through!

Jeff Sessions: Having this Racist Boor at AG would be like appointing  an ex Nazi as Israel's Attorney General

Seriously now, would you permit an uncertified or unlicensed guy who professes the skills of a surgeon (but who's been found to have botched numerous operations) to remove your gall bladder or appendix? If not, then why would you countenance the appointment of a racist scofflaw to the position of highest legal officer in the land? Would you not, as a matter of integrity for the office and respect, demand whoever aspired to this position be thoroughly vetted - especially his legal background- and not sped through with dramatic recklessness?

Let's not bandy words here: What the Repukes are trying to do  starting tomorrow with scheduling a slew of hearings for Trump nominations  is nothing short of unethical, and likely immoral as well.  And, as the NY Times noted in its editorial yesterday, this will be the first true test of the degree to which the Democrats are willing to fight, especially against the Johnny Reb racist swine Jeff Session.

To put this shameful rush into perspective, Walter M. Schaub, the Director of the Office of Government Ethics has already made his verdict known, affirming that the "pace of hearings is putting undue pressure on investigators."  (Denver Post, yesterday, 'Watchdog Worried By Rush to Confirm',  p. 12A).

Mr. Schaub informed Democrats as well as Republicans that such shenanigans are "of great concern" because the nominees have not been properly vetted.  That includes completing a detailed ethics review - by answering multiple questions in a formal questionnaire - as to do with possible conflicts of interest and ethical issues. In other words, it would be analogous to allowing a flock of doctors, dentists, lawyers through to practice without having  passed their exams or shown certification of any ability. This ought to worry not just Democrats but ALL citizens, and that includes Reepos.

As Mr. Schaub put it in a letter answering an inquiry by Democrats:

"The schedule...has left some of the nominees with potentially unknown or unresolved conflicts of interest issues shortly before their scheduled hearings."

Those with short memories might want to have them jogged regarding how Nixon VP Spiro Agnew was forced to resign (Oct. 10. 1973) when his background of political corruption and income tax evasion finally saw the light of day.  Thus underscoring the importance of doing a proper, thorough vetting of any high ranking government official.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but eight years ago Sen. Mitch McConnell insisted ALL of Obama's appointees submit to full vetting including full background checks and financial disclosures. Now, however, "Bitch" is singing a different, hypocritical tune, saying: the Dems are invoking "sour grapes"  (the same tune the Repukes are singing with the revelation of the Russian hacks) and blabbering:

"So all of these procedural complaints are related to their frustration in having not only lost the White House but having lost the Senate. I understand that but we need to sort of grow up here and get past that."

So, "Bitch", why didn't your lot "grow up" back in 2009 and just let Obama's appointees pass?  Oh wait, might it not be that "Bitch" believes there's one rule for his GOOPrs and one for the Dems? Yeppers.

As the Agnew case shows, these matters are not merely procedural complaints or technical abstractions. If a guy is allowed through to a high official position it can wreak no end of havoc on the nation, and on his party too. This is why blabbering balderdash (such as spouted by "Bitch") needs to be ignored and a proper vetting done. Again, would you really want a guy only qualified to be a cable technician removing your wisdom teeth? Or removing your gall bladder? How 'bout doing a prostate biopsy?

Well, it's the same damned thing here if we properly assume these positions bear real responsibility and aren't merely political rewards!  Nowhere is this more critical than vetting the racist, proto Confederate,  KKK sympathizer Jeff Sessions (who only backed off from a full endorsement of  the Klan because he learned they used marijuana).  Jeff Sessions, let's be clear, isn't fit to run a pig farm far less occupy the highest law position in the land, that of Attorney General of the United States. In fact, allowing this asshole to go through without a fight would be not so much different as Israel allowing a known ex-Nazi and S.S. ascend to become Israel's Attorney General.

The Senate Republicans' tactic of flooding the zone with multiple hearings over two days is itself despicable.  This is especially as many of these ultra-wealthy nominees (e.g. Betsy DeVos, Rex  Tillerson)  exhibit tangled financial interests that are nowhere near being fully vetted by ethics officials.  Also their paperwork is incomplete.

The fact McConnell made Obama's picks jump through ever hoop , dotting every i, crossing every t in this background paperwork shows the same must be demanded here. NO exceptions!.  Scanning over this  menagerie of misfits and despicables, the one that really needs a search light is Sessions.

As the NY Times Editorial put it:

"If anyone requires a thorough vetting, it’s Mr. Sessions, the Republican senator from Alabama who trails behind him a toxic cloud of hostility to racial equality, voting rights, women’s rights, criminal justice reform and other issues at the heart of the Justice Department’s mandate. Yet in their eagerness to act on his nomination, Senate Republicans seem unconcerned that Mr. Sessions, who has made appropriate financial disclosures, has failed to turn over dozens — possibly hundreds — of documents that the committee specifically requests in its standard questionnaire, including transcripts of speeches, interviews, opinion pieces and other public remarks."

The Times went on to observe that Sessions  - who up to now has not provided all relevant details regarding background and conflicts of interest, once suggested that judicial nominees may be committing crimes when they withhold relevant information from the Senate,.  Well, how about prosecuting Sessions now for his own withholding of information? Or are we to permit this hypocritical knuckle dragger to practice 'do as I say not as I do' ethics? In other words, allow a scofflaw to become AG.

He's used the absurd argument the that there is no record of the vast majority of interviews he has given over the years, but a quick Google search disproves that.  Clearly, the Dems need to force the bastard to cough up the links for every one, especially the most racially charged and hostile. Then he needs to explains each and every instance where he inveighs against civil rights, especially voting rights.

Mr. Schaub. head of the government ethics office put this even more bluntly:

"I am not aware of any occasion in the four decades since OGE was established when the Senate held a confirmation hearing before the nominee had completed the ethics review process"

Spiro Agnew clones on the way?  Maybe!

No comments: