Angry and embittered, Kavanaugh casts nomination in partisan terms
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Angry and embittered, Kavanaugh casts nomination in partisan terms
Alexander Nazaryan 8 hours ago WASHINGTON — Frequently angry and sometimes on the edge of tears, Brett Kavanaugh sought to rescue his nomination to the Supreme Court in a dramatic turn before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Rebutting Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations of sexual assault, Kavanaugh cast himself as the victim, bitterly attacking the 10 Democrats seated before him. He called the initial hearings into his nomination an “embarrassment,” suggesting that he was the subject of “left-wing opposition groups.” Sputtering with rage, Kavanaugh went so far as to claim that his opponents were seeking “revenge on behalf of the Clintons,” though he offered no evidence for that assertion.
“This is a circus,” Kavanaugh said with spite that resounded across the packed Senate hearing room, where the audience included actress-turned-liberal-activist Alyssa Milano and Facebook’s top Washington executive, Joel Kaplan, a friend of Kavanaugh from their time in the George W. Bush administration.
The circus reference was an unmistakable allusion to the 1991 testimony of Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, who called Anita Hill’s allegations during his confirmation process a “circus,” “a national disgrace” and, most famously, a “high-tech lynching.” Thomas won a narrow confirmation from the Senate, despite the seeming credibility of Hill’s accusations.
Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee. (Photo: Jim Bourg/Reuters)But Kavanaugh’s acrimony addressed to the Senate Judiciary Committee surpassed even Thomas’s 27 years ago. Never before had a Supreme Court nominee expressed himself in such nakedly partisan terms. To Kavanaugh’s supporters, he is an upstanding public servant defending himself against partisan smears of an unspeakable nature. Detractors saw an entitled political operative enraged that the prize he’d coveted for years would be potentially withheld because of a decades-old allegation. Two other women have gone public with their accusations of sexual assault by Kavanaugh. He has denied them all.
Republicans were obviously heartened by Kavanaugh’s aggressive opening. They quickly dispensed with Rachel Mitchell, the Arizona prosecutor who’d been hired to question Ford earlier in the day. Instead of allowing her to fully question Kavanaugh as well, the Republicans eventually seized control of the hearing from her. For the most part, they used their time to angrily denounce Democrats while lavishing Kavanaugh with sympathy and praise. But whether that show of solidarity with a controversial nominee convinces or backfires remains to be seen.
Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. (Photo: Saul Loeb/pool photo via AP)Sen. Lindsey Graham — a zealous if somewhat late convert to Trump’s cause — described the proceedings as “the most unethical sham since I’ve been in politics.” He called the inquest into Kavanaugh’s alleged sexual misconduct “hell” and seemed to threaten fellow Republicans who had not yet said they would vote for Kavanaugh’s confirmation: “If you vote no, you are legitimizing the most despicable thing I’ve ever seen in my time in politics,” he said.
This seemed to be directed at Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Jeff Flake of Arizona. All three have a tendency to bristle at threats of the kind Graham appeared to be making. They later held a meeting that also included Sen. Joe Manchin, Democrat of West Virginia, who sometimes votes with Republicans. Afterwards, Manchin said the crucial foursome remains undecided. Were they all to vote against Kavanaugh, his nomination to the Supreme Court would fail.
Other Republicans made similar shows of support for Kavanaugh. “I can’t think of a more embarrassing scandal for the United States Senate since the McCarthy hearings,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, alluding to Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s anticommunist witch hunts of the 1950s. To some observers, this indignation rang hollow because some of the same Republicans now rooting for Kavanaugh allowed the nomination of Merrick Garland — an Obama nominee to the Supreme Court, and currently a colleague of Kavanaugh on the D.C. Circuit Court — to languish for 293 days after he was nominated in 2016. Not a single Republican senator met with Garland, though none offered substantive objections to his record or questions about his character. The nomination was ultimately withdrawn.
The dark, angry tone of Kavanaugh and his supporters was a marked contrast from Ford’s testimony earlier in the day. While her testimony was captivating, she showed no ill-will towards the 11 Republican men arrayed before her, or the woman they’d hired — Mitchell — to question her. She even exchanged jokes with Sen. Chuck Grassley, the committee’s chairman.
Photo: Andrew Harnik/pool via ReutersThere were no light-hearted moments during Kavanaugh’s testimony. He angrily interrupted Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the committee’s ranking Democratic member, as well as Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the only Democrat who was on the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Anita Hill hearings. Asked by Sen. Amy Klobuchar if he’d ever blacked out when drinking, Kavanaugh shot back testily, “Have you?” (He later apologized for the comment, which he’d made shortly after Klobuchar revealed that her own father struggled with alcohol abuse.)
Kavanaugh’s anger eventually gave way to a more measured mood, which allowed Democrats to call into question aspects of his defense. He downplayed prurient, seemingly sexual entries in his high school yearbook, while portraying his long-standing love of beer as inconsequential and harmless. At the same time, he refused to call for an FBI investigation into Ford’s allegations. And he was repeatedly resistant to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing from Mark Judge, who Ford alleges took part in the assault.
Kavanaugh’s performance seemed less calculated to convince the unconvinced than to please the man who’d nominated him. That, at the very least, he appeared to accomplish. “Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him,” Trump tweeted after the hearing, as Republicans prepared for an evening conference to discuss the nomination’s prospects. “His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting.”
The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination on Friday. The full Senate will likely vote early next week.
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
Kavanaugh casts nomination in partisan terms
That die was cast long before Mr. Kavanaugh came along.
Agreed.
Expecting this clown show to act non partisan on anything is too much to ask for. Both sides are to blame. The Dems for going nuclear to make sure they could ram as many judges through as possible during Obama's administration- after slamming the brakes on during the last two years of the Bush administration. The Republicans for changing the Senate rules further ending filibusters; and for not giving Obama's last Supreme Court nominee a straight down vote and attaching a note to him back to the White House, "Send another and it will end up the same way".
Since the Dems can't stop Kavanaugh's nomination thanks to the nuclear option they enacted; and can't filibuster it thanks to the Republicans. They are dragging every unsubstantiated BS allegation they can coerce out of the closet. Proof, they don't need proof. Facts, they don't need those either. The allegations are all they need.
I have stated repeatedly I am not for Kavanaugh being on the SC; but what the left is doing is nothing more than a smear campaign trying to end his career.
Ah, High Bothsiderism. The laziest of what passes for a "position."
It really makes him wholly unfit for the court. He doesn't even make a pretense of impartiality.
E.A Nor would they be chosen as per Constitutional Document, what is needed is for them to be " Impartial In Enforcing the LAW as the Law makers intended! "
Now some would not understand who are the " Law Makers " and hence the problem, see what is at the top of the Document it Might help "
" We The People "
Hence for any one to claim an " Established Law " is to be totally ignorant of those facts!
He's uniquely political from spending years doing extreme republican dirty work, whether it was with the Starr investigations or being on the "stop the count" group of thugs sent to FL in 2000. After that he worked in the now only second most corrupt* White House (Bush/Cheney) in history.
*since we now are witness to the no. 1 most corrupt WH ever.
Being given a job promotion is a PRIVILEGE. The hubris and sense of entitlement shown by Kavanaugh was outrageous. He CLEARLY showed his extreme political bias, and he was completely disrespectful to the Senators and the Senate as a legislative body.
I wonder if I could even get a job much less a promotion if there were several credible allegations of sexual assault against me?
These days I'd need to become a priest or a Republican.
You could be President of the United States, given that you're a Democrat.
Fortunately for Kavanaugh, there aren't several credible allegations against him.
You mean I could be President Pussy Grabber? I hear that when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything.....grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.
.
Unfortunately for Kavanaugh and the GOP, if the FBI investigates next week it would necessarily involve interviewing Mark Judge.
Or you could be President "Lewinski".
It appears to be true, if Trump and Clinton are any indications.
I'm sure you think that would matter. I'm sure you think he would somehow reveal some sort of blockbuster evidence blearily remembered through 35 years of fading memories and addiction.
But this is real life. The fact is that almost nobody in their 50's remembers many of the parties we went to in high school. Any FBI investigation is almost surely going to bring us right back where we are now.
You mean have consensual affairs? Cool - that sounds much better than raping folks or thinking I have the privilege of grabbing the pussies of unwilling women.
OK, then let's reinstate Matt Lauer.
I'm sure Juanita Broadrick and Leslie Millwee agree.
Who actually got grabbed and why do you think they were unwilling?
Juanita Broaddrick? Are you referring to the woman who signed an affidavit stating that Clinton didn't sexually assault her?
Sounds like the FBI did indeed investigate her prior false claims. I'm not sure how that relates to this case except that there actually was an FBI investigation back then and there hasn't yet been one with the very credible allegations against Kavanaugh.
Maybe now Kavanaugh will agree to a polygraph for his job interview? After all he did rule that such tests were both appropriate and determinative for hiring decisions.
How did all of the credible allegations against Trump just suddenly go away? What did that cost?
Some 22 accusers are still around and some are in the courts right now. What hasn't materialized is Trump's threat to sue his accusers.
Signed,
Bill O'Reiley...
Right... far more than "several" and counting.
I'm sure you think so. I'm also sure if a 20 year old meth addict approached you on the street and told you Kavanaugh had abducted her on his spaceship in 1970 and used her as a sex slave, you would add that to your list of "credible" allegations.
Judge Kavanaugh beat Feinstein and the progressive left at their at their own game and it looks like he may very well get the nomination after all. Good! Hope the Dems on that committee and their ilk gag on their own tongues and bile!
Hope you'll be just as happy when women let republicans know exactly what they think of them flipping all women off by dismissing Ford without a full investigation of the charges made. Just don't want you to be shocked when women confront the gop publicly. It will happen.
I know, right? Ir's really weird that they don't want a rapist on the court, especially when he's just a typical angry white guy who thinks the world owes him something.
What rapist?
Where is your proof of someone being a rapist.
More than likely, this goes along with your sweeping generalizations that anyone that does not agree with you is a bigot or racist.
Am I psychic or what? Jeff Flake was probably being confronted by the women in the elevator when I wrote that.
It was all planned and staged. Nothing more. You only repeated what liberals have been calling for people to do to Republicans for months now.
Congratulations on knowing liberal talking points.
Way to give out the gop game plan, bugs.
There was NO WAY for that to be staged, but since the gop uses those fake tactics all the time, I'm not surprised you project that on dems. Pathetic. Be prepared for more female surprises, I think we are finally fed up with the good old boys club.
It's hilarious, but entirely predictable, that that's how you saw Kavanaugh make a disgusting shame of himself.
What I saw was a well voiced, pissed off, wrongly accused judge that handed every liberal on that committee their asses, especially Spartacus and Whitehouse.
Every one of them could not say anything but "you have to ask for an FBI investigation", where he responded over and over again he would do whatever the committee wanted him to do. It was pointed out over and over to the dumbass Democrats that THEY can ask for an FBI investigation.
Where are we now? Judge Kavanaugh never asked for an investigation, but it took a Republican, not democratic, senator to ask for an investigation. Everyone agreed to a one week investigation to go over, once again, everything that had been looked at many times over the last 2 weeks.
Of course, Dr Ford's activist lawyers do not agree with the one week limit. They, being "resistance" activists, do not want this to end. Whowouldathunk?
I'm curious if Dr Ford knows of their not agreeing to it. After all, it was found that they probably lied about her being afraid to fly and not informing her that Grassley offered to send a team out to her because of her "fear" of flight. They just wanted the limelight, and if I were Dr Ford, I would be highly pissed at them.
Aren't you one of the people that claimed to be some sort of moderate not that long ago? Hilarious.
It's always this way with them: They think they're invisible to us.
In actuality, I have never referred to myself as a "moderate". I have referred to myself as a conservative right leaning registered Independent. Big difference to me, but I am certain not to you and other progressive leftist liberals posting here who detest any that do not agree with you and share your particular mindset and world view. You have a good day now.
I couldn't give the tiniest shit whether you agree with me or any other liberal. You must have some ego to think we'd bother ourselves with that.
Funny, I feel exactly the same about you so I guess we agree on something.
After Obama wiped the floor with the Republicans.
I don't doubt that Brett "Rapist Boozer" Kavanaugh will be confirmed. The fallout from that will be that the GOP will be completely destroyed in the midterm elections.
Maybe the plan is to get him on the SC and figure out a way to repeal the 19th amendment before November.
Maybe, but to do so would be political suicide regardless of party.
Yeah just like they were destroyed for the tea party movement, the government shutdown, sequestration, not voting on Garland, nominating Trump and a million other things.
No this is about the evil of the Stalinist Democrats who seek not merely to defeat but also destroy the lives of conservative judges, justices, and political candidates
we are vigorously organizing Christians to defeat all Stalinist Democrats in the midterms to preserve ourRepublic
the Democrats have proven they are evil and as Lindsey Graham stated, must not be allowed power.
Nice to know you support a fascist dictatorship.
No surprise that half of all white evangelicals support Kavanaugh even if all the rape allegations are true.
They're very evil people.
No that’s why I oppose fascist dictatorships which is why we stand against that evil from the Democrats
We will succeed in defending our Constitutional Republic from this evil being perpetrated by the Democrats
Whose Republic? Christians? News Flash! We're not a fucking theocracy. This is not exclusively "Christians" country. We are a melting pot of cultures, faiths, races and creeds so you better get used to it. Also, you have often proclaimed Democrats adherence to the constitution and to democracy as "Stalinist" which lets anyone and everyone who knows anything about Stalin and/or socialism and communism know you're fact-less opinion is complete rubbish. It's like claiming that because a person appreciates and loves their community they must be "communists". People who make such ridiculous comparisons are merely exposing themselves as intellectual frauds.
Oh, christamighty. Give. It. A. Fucking. Rest.
You don't seem to have a clue what those two words together mean.
I oppose theocracies and support as small a government as possible, unlike the Totalitarian loving left..
the left also seems obsessed with the campaigns of personal destruction using the tactics of the Gestapo and Stalinist brigades.
its not small government conservatives resorting to these tactics. It’s the Constitution hating left
An obviously false claim given your vote for Prop h8 and your support for other CHristian sharia laws.
So when Trump suggests taking away independent media companies licenses because they said unflattering things about him, we're not allowed to point out the similarities between that and Nazi Germany, but when a woman comes forward with an accusation of attempted rape against a conservative at least a month before he was ever even nominated for a seat on the supreme court, and Democrats want a thorough investigation, that's a "Gestapo" tactic? All I can ask is, do you have any more of that stuff you're smoking? Because it must be good...
Amended for more specificity.
We'll see. Right now it sounds like Flake and some other Republicans won't vote for him on the final floor vote unless an FBI investigation occurs.
You pretend that any of this actually changes anybody's vote.
We live in the most polarized society since the Civil War. Votes were decided long ago, and nothing this week is going to change that.
Looks like they might delay the floor vote for a week so an FBI investigation can occur. That's what won Jeff Flake's vote to advance the nomination to the floor.
Also it's not surprising that half of evangelicals support Kavanaugh even if ALL the accusations against him are true. It speaks to their profoundly poor character.
Jeff Flake has said he won't run for re-election, likely due to the changing demographics in Arizona's 1st district giving Democrats the advantage. I think after this week he should consider running as an independent, his district voted for McCain in 2008 by a 10 point margin. In 2016 that 10 point edge had evaporated into a 1 point margin for Republicans. Now, with a district that has over 25% native American constituents who overwhelmingly vote Democrat, along with the fact that the "heavily Republican Prescott , the old 1st's largest city, and much of surrounding Yavapai County were drawn into the new, heavily Republican 4th District . Flakes district is now considered to be significantly more competitive for Democrats."
I think as an independent he would get support from centrist Republicans and Democrats along with the growing number of independents. Standing up for what is right, showing backbone, going against the partisan grain is an asset and rarity in politics today, the last known practitioner, John McCain, having recently passed away. Maybe Flake will take up that mantle of responsibility. I don't agree with many of the positions Flake has taken through the years, but I do applaud him for being a true centrist in this vicious environment of partisan politics.
Interesting .. I did not see that coming, but it does make sense .. running mate Bob Corker?
Hmmm .. interesting thought .. but Tester has a job to do for Montana in DC - If a party cross over was to take place .. how about Montana's former Governor Brian Schweitzer .. he has a veto brand [lol a for real heat steel til it is red hot and brand a bill :]
The governor is a for real soil scientist! … The defectors would have a cogent conservative candidate for president, and Schweitzer could bring the environmentally conscience on board...
How about a unity ticket with Chris Coons as Prez and his friend Jeff Flake as VP?
Nahh, I prefer Flake for President .. really do not know much about Coons - I do however like the idea of a unity ticket..
People have been pie-in-the-skying that for a couple of centuries now. Not-a-gonna-happen.
Participating only in an exercise of protest:
Any rational person can see the hypocrisy of these statements and yet these are the stereotypes that we've been trained to believe.
Stereotypes work in favor of the far right. They've been cultivating them for years.
And on the flip-side: