Senate Judiciary Committee Votes - Judicial Watch takes active role to highlight Clinton Corruption!

Houston Chronical ^ | 5-22-03 | Associated Press

[Joy Angela]

Judiciary panel OKs appeals court choice

Partisan `hackles' lacking at hearing

WASHINGTON --

The Senate Judiciary Committee, serious and humorous by turns,
approved Michael Chertoff's nomination to an appeals court Thursday
after a late allegation and debate that ranged all
the way to a disgraced New York Times reporter
and McCarthyism.

On the good-natured side, a smiling Sen. Charles
Schumer D-N.Y., said across the committee table at one
point to Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, "Lucky for you
there aren't two of me."

Hatch, the committee chairman who is as conservative as
Schumer is liberal, smiled back as he
, "It's a great blessing for the country."

Chertoff, the head of the criminal division at the
Justice Department and a former federal prosecutor
in New Jersey, was nominated to a seat on the 3rd
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

And while the Judiciary Committee has been the setting
for several fierce battles over President
Bush's judicial nominees in recent months, his
appointment hasn't been one of them.

The appointment "doesn't raise hackles" among senators
who have helped filibuster two of Bush's appeals
court nominees so far, Schumer said at one point.

But on the eve of a scheduled vote, Judicial Watch, a
conservative group, circulated letters to lawmakers alleging
it had "important evidence concerning the misuse of organized
crime operatives by the FBI" and other agencies.
During the time of the alleged illegal activity, the letter said, Chertoff
was U.S. attorney for New Jersey.

Democrats, in particular, pressed Hatch to hold up
committee approval of the nomination until a review
of the charges could be made. "I don't see holding
him up for an unsubstantiated allegation," said
Hatch

Additionally, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., raised
issue of a former Justice Department lawyer
suspected of leaking internal documents relating to
the propriety of an FBI interrogation of John Walker
Lindh. Lindh is the so-called "American
Taliban" who pleaded guilty last July to supplying
services to the Taliban and carrying an explosive
during commission of a felony.

Kennedy won a one-week delay in Chertoff's confirmation
last week, saying he was dissatisfied
with Chertoff's answers to questions about the
case.

The New York Times published an article during the day
about the attorney, Jesselyn Radack. In a reference to
Chertoff, Hatch said, "It's disgraceful that at this
last minute The New York Times is attempting to impugn anybody."

Moments later, Hatch noted that the author of the
article had "shared bylines with the infamous Mr.
Blair."

That was a reference to Jayson Blair, a reporter who
resigned from the Times on May 1 after the
newspaper found fraud, plagiarism and inaccuracies
in three dozen of his articles.

Hatch's remark sent a buzz through the committee room,
and Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. broke in, "Before we
get into McCarthyism here." That was a reference to
the technique of guilt by association that Sen. Joseph
McCarthy used 50 years ago in his communist witch hunts.

[isthisnickcool]

I'd bet they would sell that one the Judicial Watch site. Along with the "official" JW watch and badge you could get the LK Barbie Doll....

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

Didn't LK once sue his own mother?

[Howlin]

Way to go, Judicial Watch!

I cannot believe you are THRILLED that Judicial Watch tried to smear a good man like Michael Chertoff.

[Howlin]

And notice that Judicial Watch is back to being a "conservative group."

$$$ must be down being a "watchdog group."

[Howlin]

Please stop linking to my web page.

[Howlin]

Zippo!

BTW, "Expenses" to JW means MAIL!!!

[Howlin]

Why are you smearing a good man?

[Howlin]

Don't you find it interesting that JW has withheld it's 2002 report?

[Miss Marple]

Well, citing the New York Times certainly isn't going to have the cachet it once did. One would think they would have a clue.

Chertoff is a good guy and I hate to see him treated like this.

[Howlin]

We're not getting any answers, I see.

[Dog Gone]

I think it's more of a case of the retards at the Houston Chronicle not realizing JW's change in attitude in opposing conservatives.

[deport]

Larry Klaymer and Judicial Watch have about as much relevance now days as does Saddam Hussein. Slim and none .... and Slim has left the building.

There were two more Judicial Nominees approved in the Senate this past week..... That makes 127 so far and there are some that are clear of the Committee awaiting Frist to bring them to the floor for the Senate to confirm.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

But on the eve of a scheduled vote, Judicial Watch, a conservative group,

Since when did Judicial Watch become conservative?

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

I keep looking for ..love, Palo.... at the end of your posts.

[ladyinred]

Hatch, the committee chairman who is as conservative as Schumer is liberal, smiled back as he , "It's a great blessing for the country."

While I love the comeback Hatch gave to Schumer, I must say I laughed at the remark that he is as conservative as Schumer is liberal. Sounds like something from the Onion!

[dixiechick2000]

"love, Palo"

ROTFLOL!

[habs4ever]

You do stay on Larry's message.Well done! Nothing or no question will dent your veneer one bit.Some would call that tenacity, others zealotry, but me, I'd call that being a good employee.

Oh, notice that JW dropped the "non partisan" from its tag and is now back to being called a conservative group?

[ALOHA RONNIE]

...Today on the JUDICIAL WATCH Report Radio Show on...

.. www.JudicialWatch.org ..

...LARRY KLAYMAN stated that the members of the Judiciary Committee had agreed on a BiPartisan Investigation of CHEROFF's handling of the PETER PAUL Case =

...Another Look into HILLARY RODHAM & BILL CLINTON's own worst Campaign Misbehaviors.

STAY TUNED...

[Republican Wildcat]

well, you are already here...I was just about to ping you. It's like old times again...