If that’s the extent of it, welcome to any large organization, in any city, in any State, USA.
Just another prolonged attempt to smear a strong Democratic woman by using the courts. Why would it take three years to provide documentation?
Buckle up, Tammy. This is your version of Whitewater/Travelgate/Benghazi and they will worry it like a dog with a stuffed toy.
“Sen. Mark Kirk, a first-term moderate in a Democratic-leaning state”
I was going to come in here and make a snarky crack about TPM continuing to describe any GOP member who isn’t to the right of Dick Cheney as a moderate, but then I looked up Kirk’s voting record and it actually IS relatively moderate.
Only in repub land can Kirk be considered moderate.
Dismissed twice and it took three years for the litigants to bring forth evidence requested by the state? WTF?
Come on, Beatty…they had to wait until the right election.
Kirk rhymes with jerk. Just sayin’.
He’s also been the most vocal Republican in favor of giving Merrick Garland a hearing. He was (I believe) the first Senator to do so, and he did it in a major op-ed. Even in a close race in Illinois, he didn’t need to make his support that front and center. I respect that.
Also, when Bush’s EPA gave British Petroleum permission to dump their waste into Lake Michigan (from Gary Indiana, I think) Kirk was very vocal and eventually the waiver was rescinded.
The funny thing is that this was around the time that the oil companies where reporting profits that were literally setting world records for corporations. BP’s application for the waiver was to allow them to dump their waste by-products into the lake on the grounds that it was too expensive to process it any other way.
I’m not saying I support him, but my Democratic congressman votes more conservatively than this guy. Kirk is the definition of moderate. Pro-choice, in favor of gay rights, believes in anthropomorphic climate change, supports infrastructure re-haul, favors voting for Merrick Garland.
That is it? It sounds like she was just doing her job. This is the definition of nuisance suit.
“Pro-choice, in favor of gay rights, believes in anthropomorphic climate change, supports infrastructure re-haul, favors voting for Merrick Garland.”
For Chrissakes, what the hell is he doing in the Republican Party then? I don’t get these people.
As far as the suit goes, it just continues established Republican Party policy: all veterans—especially injured vets—are saints who should be put on the highest pedestal.
Unless they’re Democrats, of course. In that case, they’re all frauds who didn’t deserve their medals, commendations, or votes.
A seven year old, twice-dismissed lawsuit is all I need to know. Its warmed over,politically motivated garbage.
And until it comes time to pay for services they need after they’ve been injured.
After a federal judge dismissed the suit as a “garden variety workplace case,” it was refiled in state court — and dismissed again before it was narrowed and brought back a third time.
Just who has the ethics issue here, coming back for a 3rd bite of the apple by REPUGS seems to me to be more ethically challenged than Tammy.
I’m confident Rep. Duckworth will weather this storm and become a US Senator in 2017.
Come on, don’t give him too much credit. If he wasn’t fighting for survival, he would be toeing the Mitch McConnell line right along with the rest of them.
What strange bedfellows elections make when the RSCC is supporting nuisance labor lawsuits against managers trying to fire deadweight from government.
“Republican Illinois Sen. Mark Kirk is more than willing to play dirty to keep his very endangered Senate seat against his Democratic challenger, Rep. Tammy Duckworth. That means going after the Iraq war hero, who lost both her legs, for her work in the Illinois and U.S. Veterans Affairs departments. He launched an online ad this week featuring a discrimination lawsuit brought by two Illinois VA employees against Duckworth—a suit that’s already been dismissed, twice. It’s a controversial move, even among his own supporters.”