Skip to main content

I hadn't seen this diaried yet:

Link

A key witness to the character of Judge Samuel A. Alito has been removed from the Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats' testimony list, FOXNews.com has learned.

Stephen R. Dujack, editor of The Environmental Forum magazine and fellow Princeton University alumnus, was expected to testify about a controversial student organization that counted Alito as a member. Dujack confirmed to FOXNews.com late Friday that he was no longer testifying, but said he could not elaborate.

Well I don't like this! I hope the Democrats force a discussion of the disgusting Concerned Alumni of Princeton group that Alito belonged to.

The article also added:

If Dujack is not replaced by another witness familiar with CAP, Democrats opposed to Alito's confirmation may have lost some ammunition. Phone calls to Kennedy's and ranking Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy's offices were not immediately returned.
Update I found another article (the Wash Times, yuck). Looks like the right wing attacked him: Link
The move came just a day after Stephen R. Dujack was announced as a witness and hours after Senate Republicans and conservative bloggers attacked his credibility for writing that the way people treat animals was akin to Nazis' treatment of Jews.
In an e-mailed response to The Washington Times, Mr. Dujack said he will no longer be at the hearings but plans to submit comments.

Originally posted to Semblance on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 10:02 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  WTF (none)
    Not happy.

    Who got to him? Was it a Dem or Rethug? And why?

    Did they decide it wasn't important?

    Cause I think it was. I don't see that.

    I see only weird things here...

    I want anwers.

    Congresscritters. You read this shit...

    Tell us WTF is going on.

    Like...

    NOW!

    U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1999 it was 1:475.

    by Lode Runner on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 10:06:14 PM PST

    •  Dems are lame... (none)
      or Dujak if he pulled out...

      Who gives a damn if he's an anti-semite for some editorial he wrote? I want context...

      And it better be pretty damn nasty to ruin his credibility on whether someone was a member of a group and attended meetings or not.

      How hard is it to find someone who saw Alito at meetings?

      Come on Dems... this is pathetic.

      Y'all are pathetic.

      Better not be one of you people vacationing this weekend. Every one of you should be in your offices... on the phones... looking for people who saw Alito at the meetings.

      Period.

      Please feel free to go and work in private practice if you don't want the job of running our country.

      I just want to know if Alito was a member of the group and went to meetings. Whether he was an active member or not.

      That's yes or no.

      A guy who's racist against blacks can go and testify about such things...

      Whatever... this is bullshit.

      Either Dems are stupid, they have another witness, or Dujak is a coward.

      One of those things I think is true. But if Alito gets passed because Dems f'd this up...

      I want Biden's lazy head first. And then I'll take Lieberman's.

      And Reid better have a damn good save on this hearing...

      If I see Alito on the Supreme Court... Well...

      2008 is about ruining those Dems who sold my kids out to corporate America for life.

      U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1999 it was 1:475.

      by Lode Runner on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 11:28:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  aoeu (none)
    Is testifying a voluntary thing?  Can they subpoena witnesses to confirmation hearings?
  •  It was not a student organization. (4.00)
    It was a bunch of crazy cranky alums who thought that letting women into Princeton was a disaster and that affirmative action for minorities was bad, but that even more extra chances for children of alumni to get in were a moral imperative.  They were a joke and Alito was a proud member.  I was a grad student there at the time and these guys gave us lots of cynical laughs, even as they fizzled out in the face of reality.

    Not criticizing the posting of course, but if Fox news gets even this much wrong  . . .

    •  so why don't you offer to testify? (4.00)
      If you were there at the time, you're just as valid a witness as Dujack is.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 10:18:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There are lots of people in a better position (none)
        than I, and I do hope some of them testify. This organization was relatively high profile and people like me only read about them in the papers and in their own publications which sometimes made their way to our department.  But I'm sure there are many many people who had actual dealings with these idiots, such as the then young woman mentioned in the articles cited above.
    •  here's the article in the New York Times (none)
      dated March 25, 1984 (warning: pdf) reporting on that notorious incident with Concerned Alumni of Princeton. Remember, Alito continued to brag about his support for CAP in 1985, even after the organization had been thoroughly disgraced.

      As the New York Times reported, the undergraduate's sex life was discussed in Dinesh D'Souza's article. However, I am not sure now whether I'm remembering correctly about the birth control issue and McCosh Infirmary (see this comment). That particular detail could have been left out of the New York Times article for discretion's sake, or it could have been another CAP concern, because it was voiced frequently enough in other CAP articles. I just don't remember all the details now....

      But one thing is clear: it's impossible that Alito was ignorant of this scandal. That he bragged on a job application in 1985 about his support for CAP, even after this happened, is an insult to every woman who believes she has the right to her own sexual and reproductive decisions. The Dems should track this woman down and ask her to testify. She would be at least a good a witness as Dujack. Perhaps even a better one.

      "[I]n all due respect to your profession [journalism], you do a very good job of protecting the leakers." -- George W. Bush on Oct 7, 2003

      by QuickSilver on Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 12:04:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  re-reading that article (none)
        made me so angry, you can't know... Dinesh D'Souza couldn't bring himself to apologize in the New York Times for having humiliated this woman and destroyed this woman's privacy. He could only bring himself to regret "a proofreading error" and "oversight."

        Does D'Souza have any inkling of what effect this had on this woman's life? Does he have a conscience at all?

        I did NOT believe at the time that this was a "proofreading error" or "oversight." I suspected then that it was a deliberately crafted slip, with a cover story designed into it. The goal was simple: to humiliate a Freshman woman for having sex against her mother's wishes. Remember, CAP didn't believe women should be allowed to attend Princeton in any case, so she was fair game. Any woman was fair game.

        And Samuel Alito not only belonged to this small group of radical right wing alumni behind this, opposing co-education at Princeton 15 years after it had been achieved, but even bragged about his membership in CAP a year after this happened. America has no idea at all how dangerous this guy is. No idea at all.

        "[I]n all due respect to your profession [journalism], you do a very good job of protecting the leakers." -- George W. Bush on Oct 7, 2003

        by QuickSilver on Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 12:34:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I guess (none)
    Stephen will, at least partially, allow Alito to shed his CAP.

    Alito's recollection of CAP is rather curious:

    The group has no current officers from whom more information may be obtained.

    Surely past members from when he was a member would suffice? It's not the institution now that's important, but what it was back then when he was a member.

    'You can't begin to imagine how effective the Big Lie is.' N. Mailer 'TNatD'

    by jorndorff on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 10:22:31 PM PST

    •  yeah (none)
      I'd say Chanakya Sethi has a ways to go in the investigative journalism department...

      Wow. pretty lame way to end it... I mean... if you didn't do the work... don't end it by saying so.

      Wow...

      U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1999 it was 1:475.

      by Lode Runner on Fri Jan 06, 2006 at 11:31:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Is that from Alito? (none)
      "The group has no current officers from whom more information may be obtained."

      If that's Alito, it's a pretty clear demonstration of a mindset more interested in obfuscation than revelation.  This is extremely condescending, revealing a mind more interested in escaping examination than expressing meaning.  What an arrogant, pompous, self-serving, careerist rodent.  

      Next: horses appointed to the senate!

      by Bob Love on Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 01:15:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (none)
        It was from his preliminary written response to Judiciary Committee questions. Much like that first written reponse from Harriet Miers which was returned and said to have been severely incomplete.

        'You can't begin to imagine how effective the Big Lie is.' N. Mailer 'TNatD'

        by jorndorff on Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 09:22:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Time is running out (none)
    for anti-Alito petitions, if not for Alito himself.

    If you haven't done so already, please sign the below:

    American Rights at Work also

    Oppose Alito Petition

    Defending the Constitution's Stop Alito Petition

    http://ga3.org/...

    Pretty fresh petition from Moveon.org (especially if you haven't signed yet):

    Move On.org's Alito Petition

    Kinda new Democratic anti-Alito petition:

    Democratic Party's Reject Alito Petition

    Stop the NRA is also getting in on the party:

    Stop the NRA's Oppose Alito Petiton

    People for the American Way:

    Save the Court Petition

    And while you're at it: sign Planned Parenthood's anti-Alito petition, too:

    Planned Parenthood Petition

    NARAL is shooting for 500,000 signatures, please add yours:

    Naral Anti-Alito Petition

    And don't forget: urge Congress to support Plan B:

    Plan B Petition



  •  NEW MOVE ON,ORG PETITION (none)
    They've already gathered over 300,000 signatures! Add yours:

    http://political.moveon.org/...

  •  Good. (4.00)
    Some of his writings are bizarre, to say the least.  We don't need to cloud the issues. This is about Alito, not Dujack.

    "Conservatism makes no poetry, breathes no prayer, has no invention; it is all memory." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

    by reef the dog on Sat Jan 07, 2006 at 12:44:27 AM PST

  •  hmm (none)
    well maybe this is a good thing, since the GOP plan seemed to be totally based on discrediting him.  Drudge must be heartbroken his big story is moot now.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site