Kagan documents expose manipulation of reports used in SCOTUS case.

[Quantum Windbag]

I haven't had a strong opinion about Kagan and her nomination to SCOTUS before this, but this story has managed to tip the scales to me being against her. Rewriting the report of the ACOG report to reflect scientific inaccuracies and her won political views, and then passing it off as the best evidence in support of those views, should disqualify her from a seat on the nation's highest court. If she is willing to do this she does not have the moral fiber and ethics to sit in judgment of a traffic offense, and is certainly not qualified to be a justice of the Supreme Court. This is almost suborning perjury.

Notwithstanding its allegedly apolitical nature, ACOG shared this draft statement with the Clinton White House. Miss Kagan, then a deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy, already knew ACOG’s stance as a result of a July 1996 meeting at the White House, at which ACOG representatives told administration officials — according to a Kagan memorandum [PDF] — that “in the vast majority of cases, selection of the partial birth procedure is not necessary to avert serious adverse consequences to a woman’s health.”

Upon receiving the task force’s draft statement, Kagan noted in another internal memorandum [PDF] that the draft ACOG formulation “would be a disaster — not the less so (in fact, the more so) because ACOG continues to oppose the legislation.” Any expression of doubt by a leading medical body about the efficacy of the procedure would severely undermine the case against the ban.

So Kagan set about solving the problem. Her notes, produced by the White House to the Senate Judiciary Committee, show that she herself drafted the critical language hedging ACOG’s position. On a document [PDF] captioned “Suggested Options” — which she apparently faxed to the legislative director at ACOG — Kagan proposed that ACOG include the following language: “An intact D&X [the medical term for the procedure], however, may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of a woman.”

Kagan’s Abortion Distortion - Shannen W. Coffin - National Review Online

 

[Big Black Dog]

This hobo could be the devil herself but regardless she is going to get confirmed.

 

[George Costanza]

I Googled this guy:

Shannen W. Coffin (born ca. 1969) is an attorney for the Washington, D.C. law firm Steptoe & Johnson LLP who until early November 2007 served as general counsel to American Vice President Dick Cheney.

Coffin was previously at the Department of Justice, where he served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Division. In that position, Coffin was responsible for oversight of the Federal Programs Branch, a component of the Civil Division that defends the federal government in a diverse array of lawsuits, including the defense of constitutional challenges to federal statutes and agency programs, civil anti-terrorism litigation, and disputes involving access to Executive Branch information.

General counsel to Dick Cheney? Hmmmm. That's enough right there for me to question his basic motivation. I note also that he was engaged in "disputes involving access to Executive Branch information." Want to bet which side of the courtroom he was in those kinds of disputes?

I'm not saying what he says isn't correct - but I always want to know a bit about the person who is saying stuff in order to help me better understand the stuff they are saying, if you get my drift.

 

[George Costanza]

This hobo could be the devil herself but regardless she is going to get confirmed.

You need to flit on by and pay her a nocturnal visit . . .

 

[boedicca]

Typical. They left always want to know far more about the critics of their favorites than they do about the favorites themselves.

Too bad that the MSM didn't apply equal rigor in scrutinizing Obama prior to the 2008 election.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I Googled this guy:

Shannen W. Coffin (born ca. 1969) is an attorney for the Washington, D.C. law firm Steptoe & Johnson LLP who until early November 2007 served as general counsel to American Vice President Dick Cheney.

Coffin was previously at the Department of Justice, where he served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Division. In that position, Coffin was responsible for oversight of the Federal Programs Branch, a component of the Civil Division that defends the federal government in a diverse array of lawsuits, including the defense of constitutional challenges to federal statutes and agency programs, civil anti-terrorism litigation, and disputes involving access to Executive Branch information.

General counsel to Dick Cheney? Hmmmm. That's enough right there for me to question his basic motivation. I note also that he was engaged in "disputes involving access to Executive Branch information." Want to bet which side of the courtroom he was in those kinds of disputes?

I'm not saying what he says isn't correct - but I always want to know a bit about the person who is saying stuff in order to help me better understand the stuff they are saying, if you get my drift.

I know it isn't the best source, but all the documents back up the story.

 

[George Costanza]

Typical. They left always want to know far more about the critics of their favorites than they do about the favorites themselves.

Too bad that the MSM didn't apply equal rigor in scrutinizing Obama prior to the 2008 election.

I usually am the first one to get on cons who attack sources when the article or comment is critical of right wing positions. You will note that I am not necessarily being critical of this guy - merely pointing out his orientation. He's probably as sharp as a tack. Guys who get where he has been don't get there by being stupid.

But then, there are lots or partisan politicians who are not stupid.

 

[Coyote]

Typical. They left always want to know far more about the critics of their favorites than they do about the favorites themselves.

Too bad that the MSM didn't apply equal rigor in scrutinizing Obama prior to the 2008 election.

How .... strange.



How often have I heard MediaMatters lambasted as a critical source when focused on rightwing darlings? Or Factcheck?