Good analysis of Cruz. During the primaries I repeatedly told people that I thought he was more evil than Trump. I still think so.
8
What's the connection between Rosenstein and Eighth Ave? I don't follow.
Best description of Ted Cruz ever. Thanks!
17
Gail: "The country now sees Brett Kavanaugh as a rich, drunken thug who left some young women with very traumatic memories" because you and your fellow columnists and reporters have shaped the story that way.
Bret Stephens wrote one of the best descriptions of Ted Cruz that I've seen. Reminds me when Molly Ivins was writing years ago. I suspect she would have had quite the chuckle and would have been in complete agreement. She was never one to suffer a fool. Miss you Molly Ivins!
15
"But that’s not what this moment is about."
Read the relevant passages from Mark Judge's memoires. Read the excerpts from his subsequent writing (if you can stomach them). Listen to Mark Judge's ex-girlfriend who testified that the man admitted to gang-raping a drunk girl with his high school bros. Listen to the former classmates who testify to a frat culture centered around Kavanaugh's clique. Read the yearbook where the faculty (!!!) of Georgetown Prep allowed them to repeatedly debase and slut-shame Renate Schroeder, who only found out about their comments after signing a letter of support for Kavanaugh! (She's hurt and mortified.) Read the therapist's notes. Read the polygraph results. Read Deborah Ramirez's story. Listen to the testimony from Kavanaugh's college roommate. Listen to his peers who asked that their names be removed from petitions of support. Consider the allegations against Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld who coached female applicants that Kavanaugh prefered girls who "look like models." Consider Kavanaugh's relationship with the disgraced former judge, arch-misogynist Alex Kozinski, and the role Kavanaugh played in Kozinski's defense.
Though I believe Dr. Ford, I know that it will be impossible to ascertain what really happened. However, one thing has become clear. Brett Kavanaugh was a privileged, binge-drinking fratboy who behaved towards women in ways that, legal or not, preclude him from one of the world's highest honors. This is a cultural moment.
24
The 60 vote threshold to confirm a Supreme Court justice can be restored without a rule change. With a 51-49 Rep-Dem split in the Senate, just two Republican senators need to pledge that they will vote against any nominee lacking the support of 60 senators. But this shouldn't just be for this nominee. What we really need is a bipartisan group of senators pledging to uphold this for as long as they are in office. This simple act of courage could go a long ways towards restoring the integrity of the Senate confirmation process and the Supreme Court itself. See: https://www.pressherald.com/2018/09/25/maine-voices-single-lawmaker-coul...
7
Kavanaugh thinks he can just force his way through this by "categorically denying" -- that's a high-sounding term for a denial meant to withstand any scrutiny, even if it's false - all such accusations. After all, he believes he has nothing to gain by entertaining any such accusations.
On the other hand, I think he could win approval if he just admitted to some very inappropriate behavior as a youth. He could even apologize to the women personally. And then ask the Senate to forgive his sins. I'll bet they'd go along. But if this is a he-said, she-said thing, I think the time has passed in which the He always wins.
4
Bret: Oh, good, we disagree (I think). There are all sorts of important conversations to be had about cultural transformation. And there is every reason to embrace a transformation that moves in the direction of full and meaningful equality for women, as well as vastly greater awareness of sexual harassment and assault, and far less tolerance of it.
What?
I wish Bret Stephens had enough confidence to tell us how he really feels about Ted Cruz. Not since I read some of the beautiful ways Hebrews cursed their oppressors and enemies as written in the Psalms (e.g. "make my enemies unto a footstool") have I read such a beautifully literate, subtlely spiritual curse of a politician who gives the armadillo a veneer of the glamor. Stephens, though, did leave out what may have been the most pathetic, despicable thing Cruz did: cozy up to and become pals with Trump after Trump virtually accused Cruz' father of being in a plot to assassinate JFK. Only sheer ambition and the overarching drive to get ahead at any cost permit a person to sacrifice his integrity and his loyalty to his father publicly the way Cruz did. How could someone forgive such a public insult to his family as merely an incidental expense of getting ahead.
Nevertheless, and my oh my, a snake smothered with Vaseline? Definitely worthy of the Psalms, modern version anyway.
14
If Brett lied about the assault, he isn't fit to be a judge anywhere.
He doesn't remember. He is said to have been drunk a lot. She doesn't remember everything. But she does remember a lot.
Why is his not remembering okay and hers suspicious?
13
The Senate leadership has proceeded on the assumption that complainants about Kavanaugh’s behavior are suspect because the events are dated and lack clear documentation. Republican Senate leaders dismiss credible allegations as not serious for lack of a timely complaint. In a rush to vote, the Committee adopts the view that girls and women who survived sexual aggression without resort to legal process have no business putting a public spotlight on past harmful behavior by males seeking higher office.
A crucial point has been lost in the current controversy. The point is not that Judge Kavanaugh’s past behavior should be treated as a criminal investigation and only addressed after presentation of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That is simply the wrong standard to apply to the public interest decision before the Senate.
Dr. Blasey-Ford and Ms. Ramirez made the decision to come forward because they can recount personal knowledge of Judge Kavanaugh’s past behavior. Their willingness to testify under oath to painful personal secrets is sufficient to award each of them the same presumption of credibility as Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony under oath. With that presumption, their stories can and should be part of the public record that members of the Senate weigh in the balance when deciding whether Judge Kavanaugh is a person whose life experience, professional qualifications and character warrant a life appointment to the highest court of the United States.
5
I don't recall over the years a lot of about nominations for the Supreme Court with the exception of Anita Hill, and maybe Harriet Meyers. David Souter comes to mind as well as Sandra Day Oconnor. The latter turning into a centrist. She was instrumental in the Bush V Gore fiasco. It seems to me that was when I noticed the beginning of politics rising up from the Court.
I am most disturbed by how chummy Kavanagh is with Trump. Kavanagh being coached in the White House for his upcoming Senate hearing. That to me is unheard of. If this isn't corruption at the highest then show me an example. It is so obvious to anyone who is even half awake that Trump has his man on the Court to stand up for him when the Mueller subpoena arrives.
Keep praying for a Blue Wave on November 6.
Vote as if your life depended on it because it does.
18
For all the falsehoods Trump has spread
He told the truth about “Lyin’ Ted”
Or “Lyin’ Rafael” better said.
Among other things, he lied about Beto’s nickname, which he’s had since childhood as a kindergarten photo shows. There is a Texas Senate candidate who opportunistically changed his name to appeal to voters: it’s “Lyin Rafael”!
5
Great article, great concept, great attempt to simplify a somewhat varied,complex issue into a more digestible/comprehensible form
that still could have benefited from more judicious editing.
2
The trouble with Kavanaugh’s nomination is not that he may have behaved horribly in high school and college, but that he is expecting to be treated differently because he is a judge, and has behaved as a judge toward his accuser, not as a defendant who is presumed innocent til proven guilty. He tried his own case on FOX news, and judged himself innocent.
If as well educated a judge as he is purported to be tries a case in the press, and does not have the sense to have an attorney represent him, and does not hold his silence before the case is heard, I’m just positive that this man is not of the caliber for the highest court in the land.
Unless we now have an opening for the Chief Prejudicial Justice.
6
As always i LOVE this dialog, and Gail you have sooo nailed Senator Cruz. My one concern here though is about the whole Supreme Court thing: What if he REALLY didn't do it? Any of it? It is all very well to say (as other columnists in this newspaper have said "decent men don't do this" -right, they don't. But what if he DIDN'T? Are we really in a world where fate is decided by this sort of process? What happens next? How does this end when the best lack all conviction and it would seem possible the worst are full of passionate intensity?
@John Anderson – does it not seem that if this accusation were alleged against an innocent person, that person would do everything in his power to prove his innocence? Would he not willingly subject himself to a lie detector test, and ask for a full FBI investigation of the charges, in order to do so?
6
The Kavanaugh nomination is not about sex. It is about character and truthfulness. Kavanaugh has not been truthful about several matters, but, he his clearly lying with respect to his teen years. There have been numerous witnesses who have attested to his "bad boy' behavior, not to mention his own yearbook biography (ask Michael Avenatti what the FFFFFFFourth of July is). Had he started with statements acknowledging he behaved poorly, yet he has matured he might not have to dig in with more lies. He could request the FBI's involvement himself, he could stop the senate from turning the proceeding into a trial that will prosecute Blasey Ford. A Supreme Court Justice should have the basic ability to make good decisions. Kavanaugh continues to make bad judgements on a rudimentary level.
Sexual assault is about power as is this sham of a hearing. Sexual assault is a about intimidation as are the proceedings scheduled for Thursday. This intimidation isn't limited to the women accusing Kavanaugh it also to intimidate any senators who may have be inclined to vote against Kavanaugh, particlularly Murkowski and Collins. The "good ole boy network" lives.
4
One would think that Judge Kavanaugh himself would want exculpatory evidence entered into the Senate record. The fact that he does not think it pertinent is a tell in itself. Like all bullies, he believes he is holding the winning hand, in this case of power. A judge who doesn't believe in evidence does not belong on the Supreme Court.
12
The irony in all of this is that you folks who are buying these accusations of a juvenile Kavanaugh are likely to end up with someone far less palatable when it comes to his or her decision making on the supreme court.
1
>>> "You . . . are likely to end up with someone far less palatable when it comes to his or her decision making on the supreme court."
Well, in the Trump Era, anything is possible, but it's a bit difficult to envision a worse candidate than Kavanaugh -- at least, a worse candidate who could be confirmed, even by the shameless scoundrels who currently control our Senate.
11
@Ed Bukszar –
No irony involved – it's a given that we'll end up with a conservative justice being confirmed. The point is, Kavanaugh seems to have a lot of negative noise in his background, and also seems to have perjured himself a couple times.
We know there are other conservative judges who would be at least as qualified as this guy, but are known to be of good character.
Almost makes one suspect that DT chose him BECAUSE he's liar.
4
I heard someone say recently that we believe the children molested by priests 35 years ago...I have numerous acquaintances who were put in the same position 35 years ago and never told anyone. I remember the rich frat boys who had their way with anyone they could get into their rooms. And so do most of us women. But yes, this is about power and privilege and people who will say whatever is needed to get what they think they deserve. So there are nests of snakes and serpents in DC and in most other places. Praying to Mary has not worked, nor has praying to Michael the Archangel, I wish someone would defend us against the wickedness and snares of the devil, but methinks we must do it ourselves.
10
Kavanaugh ran with a group of drinkers in high school and his own year book page is an homage to his HS drinking. It also appears that he continued to drink heavily at times in college. He is probably telling the truth when he says he has no recall of the party, the incident or his alleged assault of Dr. Ford. He simply can't remember being at the particular party or what happened. He could take a lie detector test and pass regarding whether he believes the event happened. He may have trouble with any questions about his drinking and if there were times he couldn't remember what happened. If he was never confronted with what happened at the party shortly after the event, he would not have had a contemporary recollection that there was a gap in his memory of that night. Right now he doesn't know what he doesn't know. Unfortunately a Trump nominee could never admit a past problem with drinking that he may or may not have overcome. If he could, that might go some way to repair his reputation and show remorse for the pain that it appears he caused Dr. Ford.
4
Bravo. Nicely done.
2
I think just about every Senator in Congress is guilty of situational ethics . . . .
2
Gail: "Kavanaugh is entitled to a presumption of innocence and an opportunity to clear his name."
What Kavanaugh is entitled to is for everyone to know that according to a review of 12 studies which sought to estimate the prevalence of false accusations of rape that, on average, only 2% to 10% of rape allegations are false. With three allegations of sexual abuse now public (and a fourth on the way), that reduces the likelihood that Kavanaugh "didn't do it" to 1 in 33.
Given this reality, the real question is why hasn't his name been withdrawn yet.
8
With Kavanaugh is dealing with accusations of bad behavior I wonder what Clarence Thomas is thinking these days. Will he resign since now he really knows that the world believes Anita Hill and not him? Kavanaugh should not be confirmed as a SCOTUS! However, the alternatives from Trump are even more awful for women & children of this country!
2
That old curse, may you live in interesting times, Chinese or not, is definitely upon us.
Surely, since there is likely no way to prove whether or not Kavanaugh committed sexual assault, not once but at least twice, Republicans can find a better nominee.
They would, if they were not obsessed with pushing Kavanaugh through the process instead of using due diligence before they vote.
The FBI should investigate. Period. Deborah Ramirez should also testify. Time is not as important as getting a true man of integrity on the SC.
Based on Times reports, Mr. Kavanaugh sounds like he was an overly entitled adolescent. That said, attempted rape is not about sex; it's about power, no matter how much drinking was going on.
As for Rosenstein, the situation is a true dilemma for Trump, but he'll boil it down to loyalty.
It will be an interesting week, added to the flooding here in coastal SC.
6
Like Mr. Stephens, I'm reluctant to give up on presumption of innocence, even when a much milder standard of evidence would seem to be justified, and even though I find Dr. Ford's story very credible. I was leaning toward accepting Kavanaugh's confirmation, even though I personally hate what he stands for and resent the heck out of the Republicans for their approach here.
My opinion has shifted in the last day, however, over something that, on its surface, seems much milder: the yearbook entry. It's not attempted rape, but it's ugly, and it's there in black and white. I may have done some shameful, clumsy things in high school, but I'd never have written something like that, or even spoken like that. If he had apologized instead, sort of like Ms. Collins suggested, I might still be inclined to forgive. But his lawyer's explanation was just laughable. I knew people like that in high school and in college, and they should not be Supreme Court justices, especially not if they're not contrite and still willing to lie about it.
9
Thank you, both of you!!! It's such a relief to laugh about this endless train of awful news. I can truly hardly open my laptop in the morning this week. Gail, you are always the best, and in Bret Stephens you have a worthy foil!
4
This confirmation process is an undistorted reflection of the character of the nominator and the confusion of the country.
Our house is bleak.
"Never can there come fog too thick, never can there come mud and mire too deep, to assort with the groping and floundering condition which this High Court of Chancery, most pestilent of hoary sinners, holds this day in the sight of heaven and earth."
3
Gail Collins - what Brett Kavanaugh is accused of is not about sex.
It's about power. It's about Brett Kavanaugh's apparent need to dominate, mock and humiliate women by hurting them physically. So far in ways that haven't wound up sending him to prison.
Brett Kavanaugh is also invested in hurting and dominating women in legal opinions. See the young woman held in an immigration camp that he denied an abortion to.
Saying it's about "sex" makes it sound like a common human failing. We're all interested in sex, we all have sex.
Saying it's about "power" and "dominance" is the real story here.
Nice work from Bret Stephens carving up Ted Cruz. From your mouth to God's ear.
9
I think some commentators are confusing two things.
One is Judge Kavanaugh's person and career, where fairness and innocent until proven guilty should be the standard.
The other is appointing a person to a high court. The standard should be much stricter for appointment and much lower for rejection.
Being appointed to the bench is not a right, it is a privilege, to serve the people. Judges decide over persons' status and well being and even over their lives. Judges in the Supreme Court protect democracy. They must meet the highest standards.
Maybe Judge Kavanaugh meets those standards, and maybe not, but that is how he should be judged for this appointment.
5
@Flip –
'innocent until proven guilty' is the standard for a criminal case, which this is not.
These hearings are about Kavanaugh's character and fitness for the SC.
Thus far, he's not looking fit.
2
Hi, Gail and Bret,
I love your repartee... always have.
But the edge to your humor is getting sharp enough to bring back re-runs of SNL's "Samurai Dry Cleaners."
Perhaps it's getting more difficult to find anything really humorous these days, right?
2
The issue is no longer whether you believe Ford or Kavanaugh. The advent of the yearbook and the jocks who used a code to claim the had sex with a girl named Renata and brag about how much beer they intended to drink, has become the issue. The judge has said that posting the reference to Renata was about a date and a kiss (which she says he never got.) She is quoted as understanding its meaning and how horrible it is. For a teenager to do something as crude and disgusting as claim in their yearbook to have had sex with a girl, as if it was part of a club, is the actions of a boy. To deny having done this, is the action of a man who lacks moral character. Believe either of the two about the attack, the book speaks for itself.
11
Gail Collins wrote: "What was that old Chinese curse about living in interesting times?"
"May you live in interesting times" is an English expression purported to be a translation of a traditional Chinese curse. The saying is apocryphal. No actual Chinese source has ever been produced. The true author of the quote is believed to be British statesman Joseph Chamberlain (1846-1914).
In other words, Gail, it's a faux Asian quotation invented by a white British dude and frequently recited by white columnists so that they appear to be multicultural and well-rounded when they are not.
3
Hey, Bret. How is someone who has perjured himself before the Senate committee fit to be on the SCOTUS? Kavanaugh denied receiving or having access to stolen emails and other information. It's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that this is true. He, therefore, committed perjury under oath. That, alone, makes him unfit. His lies about this sexual assault are on top of his original perjury.
11
Now that there are 3 (three) (count 'em) allegations about Kavanaugh's past, it's clear that the Senate committee should be woefully embarrassed by the poor investigation done into the history of this prospective lifetime nominee. Either that, or a proper investigation was done and the results blithely ignored. What a massive mess-up.The press and the public should not have to be coming forward now about things unknown or disregarded by investigators. I'm ashamed for the Committee, and for our country.
5
Wow.
It's jaw dropping that Ms. Collins essentially takes the position that whether the accusers' allegations are true or not, Judge Kavanaugh should be punished for them.
That, my friends, is the upside down world of totalitarianism. The truth does not matter. Only the accepted version of what reality is matters.
That view is all well and good, Ms. Collins, until your husband, father or son is accused. I'll bet then you won't say the truth does not matter. I'll bet then you won't agree that the mere allegation, without the foundation of truth, is justification enough for them to lose their job or reputation or worse.
Make sure you want to live in the world you're trying to create.
That kind of world has existed in this country before, where society mandates that the allegation of a person of a certain type against a person of another type requires belief regardless of the underlying truth. Read To Kill a Mockingbird.
1
@B.K.
Let's not be disingenuous here. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that Kavanaugh did what he is accused of.
Circumstantial does not mean valueless. It can still be factored in, along with other acts relevant to Kavanaugh's character, to yield a likelihood.Character is a key measure for a Supreme Court justice.
There is even an eyewitness who conveniently cannot recall piling on top of the struggling girl. Naturally Kavanaugh and Mark Judge both refuse a polygraph or an FBI investigation. Mark Judge is not compelled to testify under oath.
Kavanaugh is not being tried in a criminal court; he is not facnig loss of his freedom or a fine. The "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard does not apply here.
But let's say I accept what you put forth: we cannot determine whether Kavanaugh attempted to rape her. Okay. But even absent that, he still fails the test of character based on other acts he has committed.
He is in denial of his drinking problem and is less than transparent about his gambling debts; he tries to weasel out of direct questions he is asked, rather than being forthright, All of this weighs on his character as being unfit to be a Supreme Court justice.
3
@B.K.-I'm sorry if false accusations have harmed someone you know. And of course that's horrible when it happens. If you read enough of Ms. Collins' columns, you'll know what you claim isn't what she supports.
1
Re. Bret Stephens' take on our Texas Senate race, just a reminder to those who agree: Without PAC money, Beto is in a final push against the tons of such money on offer to Cruz. Remember, Blue Staters, it is absolutely legal to pitch in. Many thanks in advance from all us Texans who are working to break free of one-party rule!
6
I found Bret's comment unintentionally funny:
"The fate of the Republic versus my self-respect."..
why start now? the loss of both or either never appeared to trouble you before.
1
As a Texan who is well aware of the attributes of both candidates for US Senate in our state, Bret Stephens’ description of our junior Senator is extraordinarily accurate. Our junior Senator is an embarrassment to all the caring and thinking people in our state, of which there are many. He is an embarrassment to even the stereotype of our state. A “slimy snake” or “the highly principled and sincere Democrat Beto O’Rourke” - hmm, is there even any doubt who would better serve ALL the people in Texas and our nation?
5
Thank you Bret for your superlative flaying of Ted Cruz--and totally true. I have long believed that Cruz is a malignant narcissist like Trump. I hope that Beto--with your permission--uses your sentiments in a TV commercial.
4
This was very amusing, if I'm allowed to say that given some of the subjects discussed. And Bret, your tirade on Ted Cruz is priceless. We must ALL copy and paste it where ever you can!!
3
Maita Moto
Maita Moto
San Diego | Pending Approval
WHERE are the Law Schools such as Harvard and Yale that when Mr. Kavanaugh-- of lately Fox News, was selected to be a member of the SC, in seconds they supported his robust (though half unknown) "judicial" background? Now, if law schools want to teach to further generations what law is about, they should-- and I mean all the law schools of this country-- oppose his nomination just based in legal grounds: this judge (he shouldn't even be a judge) brought his case himself and as a prop, his wife, to FOX TV.
2
I wish Bret let us know how he really feels about Ted Cruz. I would also add that the man he is now praising has, in addition to insulting Cruz's wife, continually called Ted a liar [perhaps one of Trumps' very few correct statements] and accused his father of killing President Kennedy. What a man!
1
Al Franken informed us Ted microwaves tuna in the Senate break room, that fact alone should remove Ted from the Senate. That tuna will never get the smell of Ted off him.
3
Everyone is going on about whether she's telling the truth as if this is a male-female he said, she said.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the reality. All those shallow "Believe Her" signs miss the point.
Everyone believes her - everyone. Even Trump believes her.
And no one believes him. That's not the issue at all.
The main point of contention is whether the punishment fits the act. Should men be criminalized for being pigs?
Further - should woman judge men? Should the rich judge the poor? Should whites judge blacks?
What if men making women feel "uncomfortable" is caused by testosterone? Maybe, then, men are not culpable due to the temporary insanity of being on a very very powerful drug.
No woman can possibly understand testosterone - so can they understand or judge men? Or would that be like a white jury judging a black man? Is that fair, or is there too much bias?
That's the jugular question.
Furthermore, women are Not Alone in being traumatized by a powerful Testosterone assault.
Many men are also severely damaged and traumatized by that same bad actor. And not just deeply traumatized - but also savagely killed.
Women deal with sexual assault during their lives, whereas men deal with War.
The thin veneer of civilization separating us from the jungle often cracks and we are made uncomfortable or worse.
Who then is at fault? Shall we rail against life?
3
Bret Stephens recommends an FBI investigation of Dr. Ford´s and Ms. Ramírez´s accusations, with the proviso that "it can’t drag on forever". What´s the rush. The Senate Republicans were willing to put off the nomination of a replacement for the late Justice Scalia sine die or until they got dealt a better hand, which unequivocally they did. There should be no rush to fill a lifetime appointment. Faced with both women´s credible stories and Judge Kavanaugh´s delirious argument--"I was a virgin"--, we need a very thorough and detailed vetting.
9
Bret Stephens must live with his head under a rock. To imply that women have as much motive to make up these stories as men do to deny them makes no sense at all. If the women were making up these stories, the stories would come out quite differently. He's ignoring the yearbook, Mark Judge's writings, the "sorry I got aggressive after losing another game of dice" and classmates corroborating Kavanaugh's youthful behavior. Further, using drugs other than pot after age 18 disqualifies you from the Supreme Court, so why doesn't illegal drinking after age 18? Not just run-of-the-milll everyone-does-it drinking, but frequent, blackout drinking.
4
Ms. Collins, the country does not view Kavanaugh as a rich, drunken thug; you do. And it seems very likely to me that the young woman with the traumatic memories seems to be the only person who remembers them, and was amazingly drunk at the time. Accuser number two doesn't have any memories at all. But Kavanaugh should apologize for everything. Dandy solution.
A claim most people will react to with: "You're nutz!"
Christine Blasey Ford's legal team holds the trump [sic] card in the negotiations for her testimony, and it is a crying shame that they frittered it away without apparently even playing it.
Consider.
There is no statute of limitations on (attempted) rape in Maryland, where the alleged crime occurred.
So...
Blasey's lawyers could have leaned across the table and said to Mike Davis, Grassley'as chief negotiator:
1. Mike, Baby, you have 15 minutes to accept our previously outlined terms for Ms. Blasey's testimony.
2. Don't accept and Blasey will promptly file a criminal complaint against Judge Kavanaugh at the Montgomery County Court House.
3. Gnash your teeth, Mike, there is nothing you can do to impede the legal process that this will trigger.
[9 minutes, Mike]
4. The State's Attorney in Montgomery County, John McCarthy, is a Democrat. Do you think he'd like to run for Governor in 4 years based on the fact that he opened the investigation which ended up in an indictment and nolo contendere plea by Kavanagh?
[3 minutes]
5. Montgomery County is bluer than blue. Out of 11 county legislators, exactly 0 (zero) are Republicans. Think of the Grand Jury and jury pool implications of that!
So Judiciary is going to recommend SCOTUS confirmation for someone who may be indicted for a Class A felony?
No they're not!
I'll take your silence for acceptance, Mike.
Why haven't Blasey's lawyers used this tactic?
Beats me!
4
@arbitrot Thank you for making me laugh a little in the face of this national disaster - Well done!
1
Revised Republican Rape Rules : HE was young and/or drunk, therefore NOT his fault. SHE was drunk, therefore completely her fault.
Use as needed. And repeated. Seriously.
11
This is nothing to joke about. Kavanaugh will vote to overturn or restrict women's right to an abortion.
The "Gail & Bret" show is ucking it up about something that cost poor women their lives.
1
The best description of Ted Cruz bar none
4
Re: Ted Cruz and the senate race in Texas. If I were Mr. O'Rourke, I would run the following ad: on blilboards, 30 second tv ads, etc. It's a three panel ad:
A picture of President Trump's tweet insulting the wife of Senator Cruz. A tweet/quote from Cruz praising Trump recently. Finally, a question: If Senator Cruz treats his wife this way, how do you think he'll treat you?
"... he’s like a serpent covered in Vaseline."
Perfect.
4
A very thoughtful debate. And possibly the best takedown I have ever heard, here of Ted Cruz. Most deserving of Mr. Stephens' diatribe. And the final two reasons Mr. Stephens gives are brilliantly on-target.
4
This conversation is missing something because neither of you spoke of Renate Dolphin, or the significance of the Georgetown prep young men who listed themselves as "Renate Alum".
The woman in question says she never kissed Kavanaugh. He says, he chastely kissed her, as a virgin, and he and all those other boys thought enough of her to mention her in the yearbook.
Another accuser who dated Mark Judge says she told him their group liked to get young women drunk, beyond the point of what the young women could remember... There is also reference, by Kavanaugh, in his yearbook to belonging to the Devil's Triangle, which insinuates a menage a trois.
Kavanaugh should be questioned -- extensively -- on what these yearbook references meant to young people. It slipeed by the yearbook adult sponsors back then; will such references slip by our Senators, as it seems they did Mr. Stephens and Ms. Collins...
Educate yourselves. This is indeed about sex, class and wealth. By the way? Renate Dolphin no longer supports her former classmate... I hope she gets therapy if she indeed remembers what might have happened to her one drunken high-school night.
5
Bret Stephens' description of Ted Cruz is a classic. I thought Lindsay Graham suggesting if you shot Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate you couldn't be convicted was the best. Bret just raised the bar.
So, how is it that the good people of Texas elect slime balls like Cruz and Gohmert. Must be something in the water or maybe the education system. Go Beto.
1
@Gary Bernier-Texas Republicans have done a lot to keep citizens from voting: Voting Rights Act violations, redistricting, gerrymandering, voter intimidation, misleading voters about polling locations, language access problems, and other outright voter suppression tactics. Plus the additional insult: Texans have no way to validate their vote was counted; a very useful tactic when voters are being shunted to use provisional ballots. But Texas is a state where a gun license will qualify as an ID to allow you to vote.
https://www.aclutx.org/en/news/sorry-state-voting-rights-texas
U.S. appeals court lets Texas' revamped voter ID law take effect https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2018/04/27/appeals-court-uphold...
1
To sit on the supreme court for life is an honor not a right. The person we trust to sit in judgement over the entire country needs to be above reproach regardless of their political views. Can we really say that kavenough meets this standard.
Dr Ford's behavior in college and her chosen career demonstrates that something happened to her. She sought therapy in 2012 long before kavenough was being considered for the supreme court. Her work has helped a lot of people, she's admired by her colleagues and students and beloved by her family. Yet she risked all of that to make these accusations. She has more to lose than she has to gain for this entire mess.
Kavenough on the other hand wanted to ask Clinton questions about Monica Lewinsky that were so repugnant wiser heads chose to ignore them. His time in the Bush White House is shrouded in secrecy. His finances are questionable. These are not characteristics that makes someone worthy of the supreme court. Surely we can do better.
5
Even if Kavanaugh did this, it doesnt matter. It matters how he acts as a mature adult. Her experience does not merit consideration, its not that important. Kavanagh is a good man and he should be on the court based on his record. Democrats should practice redemption of Man, allowing a person to live past his transgressions (even though Kavanaugh is innocent). Why would we ever let anyone out of prison if we can't reform people? Is punishment that important to Democrats? I thought they "cared" about people (only if they are Democrats)? Can a man ever have a life after sexual abuse? Can he ever work again? Is he forever punished? And a woman's 5 minute high school emotional experience does not merit this scrutiny.
These conversations are the best. More, please!
1
As the twig is bent, so grows the tree. Old time proverb, only too true.
3
I wish these two could have discussed a developing and crucial component of Thursday's hearing:
The GOP's hiring of an unnamed female alleged to be
" an experienced sex crimes prosecutor " to question Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford.
The development is quite disconcerting on several levels; first- this is not a criminal case and two, the refusal to disclose the name and resume of the individual to (even) Dr. Ford's attorneys- does not pass the proverbial smell-test; it is almost a certainly, Judge Kavanaugh and the White House have been apprised of the individual's identity.
Do we really believe Chuck Grassley is doing this for altruistic reasons to spare the sensibilities of Dr. Ford or is this a game of last minute " gotcha"? Interpretation: "How can you accuse us of being insensitive beasts when we've given you a fellow woman to ask questions."
Grassley & Graham are turning this into a criminal case by slight-of-hand, right before our eyes with Dr. Ford turned into perpetrator.
3
So many people are missing the point. This is not a trial and presumption of innocence is not a right that automatically goes to the candidate. It is a job interview for a job where character is just as important as experience.
Although it may be impossible to prove or disprove the accusations of sexual harassment or attempted rape, there is ample testimony from his friends that Kavanaugh drank to the point of obliteration in high school and college. I want to know if and when this behavior stopped and if we can trust that it will never happen again.
3
What gets lost about Kavanaugh is that his alleged louche behavior in High School and College is not a one-off character flaw. He also has debt and gambling problems, alcohol issues and has lied under oath. Then there was that strangely prurient list of detailed and irrelevant questions for Bill Clinton in addition to his willingness to be Trump's sycophant and view presidential power as unlimited.
Yes, I'd feel very different about him if he'd only responded to Dr. Ford's accusation by saying something like Collins suggested about spending the rest of his life reflecting and trying to become a better person in this and all areas. But he didn't. He became defiant and angry and continued to forcefully display himself as a wholesome family man.
I now hope (against hope) that Collins, Murkowski, Flake and Corker will show the same courage that Dr. Ford has shown and be willing to acknowledge the whole picture: Kavanaugh appears to be an emotionally stunted man and he does not qualify for a seat on the Supreme Court.
6
If I once wanted, I no longer want him on the Supreme Court.
Brett Kavanaugh has his own family exposed and uses his family to “show” how good he is, to get what he wants, his ambition to sit on the supreme court. It makes me almost ill to look at him. I can only imaging how his wife must feel. If he was a real man who cared and loved his wife and children he would withdraw.
And what really, really, really gets me is that folks who had no blemishes but perhaps employed a undocumented nanny or housekeeper got booted.
We are still right now getting exploited for being women.
Nothing has changed.
1
I tracked down and read Blasey's thesis for her Ph.D in Psychology. There's an interesting section in it which investigates what type situations, environments and stories are more likely to cause aggressive physical behavior in young boys. Makes you wonder.
3
I didn't like Kavanaugh because his previous committee testimony was evasive. He seems to keep finding himself in situations that everyone else was fully aware of (stolen documents, weird judge sending offensive jokes, "enhanced interrogations") but miraculously never knew anything about all this. And that was before he went on Fox News. If that isn't compelling evidence that this is merely a partisan appointment I don't know what is.
4
The case against Kavanaugh is so completely made that he should abdicate from the nomination and resign his current judgeship. This case and accusations (plus potential later new accusations likely to come) will sully and negatively haunt every judgment he will be involved in.
Mr. Cosby was JAILED today. Next will come judicial fines and civil court settlements and awards.
3
What is the key problem with the NFL?
Equating any private business with this country and patriotism or teaching the kids to unconditionally love somebody else’s private property.
From this stage to electing as the president a billionaire that blackmailed the community into constructing a billion-dollar stadium on behalf of his privately-owned property is just a tiny step.
Would any reasonable and independent free press actively participate in such a kind of fraud and deception?
Protesting the national anthem, the symbol of country’s solidarity and unity, is absolutely useless and counterproductive.
If we teach the kids from their earliest age that their happiness is coming from the billionaire owners of the professional sport franchises, don’t wonder later why they preferred the same kind of individuals as their elected leaders.
You taught them to feel, think and act in such a way!
2
@Kenan Porobic Excellent point. Sadly. thank you for bringing up this point. Why, when we publically revere people not based on the quality of their actions but on the wealth and power they accumulate, do we act surprised when our society crumbles under our feet.
1
I'm going to be an awful quibbler and point out that "May you live in interesting times" is at best apocryphal, probably not Chinese. I'm not Asian, but this sort of pseudo-Confucian wisdom might be problematic.
I wholeheartedly agree that we are in the midst of a transformation if not of Western culture, then American. As an American male raised in Europe, I had huge issues with my native country's perfomativities of masculinity growing up and as an adult. They aren't just an assault on women; the shaming of men who don't want to or can't behave that way is extremely stressful.
It's very clear from Kavanaugh's yearbook page and the anecdotes that are emerging from his peers that he was deeply immersed in this toxic American masculinity. "Locker-room humor" Trump is also cut from that brutish mold, which DH Lawrence called the American "stoic, killer soul."
The ultimate platform stage for these behaviors is the NFL. Broad-shouldered, slim-wasted Neanderthals knock each other around in what is pretty much just 60 minutes of strutting and posturing—the average game has a total 12 minutes of action. What the concussion scandals and Colin Kaepernick are doing to force a reckoning with American football are also worth noting when we talk about cultural change.
As far as this Ameropean who strained under the "100 Keg" culture back when he was struggling to fit in at an "elite" private school in the early 80s, that change cannot happen fast enough.
1
"The real issue is whether a respected judge can be held accountable for a drunken sexual assault he made as a teenager."
No Gail, that is not what he should be held accountable for. It's much simpler than that. He has flatly denied these events took place. Therefore, it is now about whether or not he is truthful. Something that was always a bit of a question based on the evasiveness of some of his answers, and the handling of the process in general.
I don't believe there is room for someone to get a lifetime appointment to the highest court of the land that can not be trusted. Plain and simple.
5
Concerning the notion of truth, consider this.
Two men are in a room. The room has a ball suspended halfway between the floor and ceiling.
The ball is released from its hold.
One man says the ball rose, while the other says it fell.
You might be saying, one of them must be lying but I need more information.
Very well. What if I said the ball was filled with lead.
Aha! The man who says the ball rose must be lying.
Makes sense, but now, what if I also told you that one man was standing on his head and that both men are actually telling the truth. One saw the ball rise and the other saw it fall.
The lesson: First off, our logic is too often prejudiced by what we consider normal (like not standing on your head). Secondly, outside observers can't know the truth with absolute certainty, they can only infer it from second hand information. And finally, truth depends on perspective and it is therefore possible that two people can witness the same event and see two entirely different things happen.
1
You have to love this "debate" where "liberals" and "conservatives" just, you know, agree with each other that Ted Cruz is "slimy", to use a lovely phrase coined by the Times' house conservative. What's interesting though is that former conservative Bret is now basically a 20th Century liberal: he harbors silly ideas but at least believes in equal protection and presumption of innocence. Gail, on the other hand, has wandered off the democratic reservation along with many of her progressive fellow travelers: she now doubts the presumption of innocence, at least with (real) conservative Republican males. This is dangerous territory but it is where the left is going. So perhaps these little "debates" should not be viewed as conservative vs. liberal, but as liberal vs. progressive: certainly no conservative thought appears in this discussion.
I'm sorry ms collins but there's no such thing as a short novena. It's nine days or nothing. ( it's ok, I still love your
work - a lot.)
1
The Republican Party under Trump is exposed as something close to a crime syndicate. Brett Kavanaugh played by all the rules and now he wants to be a made guy on the Supreme Court for staying true to form. He doesn't think its fair that the #MeToo movement changed all the rules just as he was about to take the gold ring. Actually, the #MeToo movement is holding him accountable to the violation of an older rule, just as golden.
4
That is probably the best and most pointed description of Ted Cruz I have ever seen. And funny too.
3
Hats off to Mr. Stephens! Never has anyone described Ted Cruz more accurately.
3
These are not interesting times, they are dangerous times. We are witnessing the destruction of our Constitutional government by the Republican Party. The rush to place morally questionable Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court s one of many anti-democratic actions taken by the Republican one-party dictatorship.
The refusal to allow Obama to exercise his lawful right to nominate Garland to the Supreme Court, the corrupted election of Trump with Russian assistance, the dismantling of every federal agency charged with protecting the rights and needs of the American people, the poisoned relationship with our true allies..the list goes on.
There is no confusion, Supreme or otherwise, on the part of the majority of American voters. They know Trump, Kavanaugh, McConnell. Ryan et al., seek absolute unending power on behalf of their corporate owners. There is massive confusion, however, on then part of the religious fundamentalists and the knee-jerk members of the Republican Party who cannot seem to tell the difference between right and wrong.
3
The yearbook changes everything. We know have a character witness, in the form of Brett himself. We know he liked to drink in high school. We know he sexual harassed women in high school (because the yearbook entry is, if nothing else, sexual harassment).
So the factual question has, in my humble opinion, been addressed.
Now, are the men on the committee going to do the right thing or not?
5
Gail: “[E]ven if he’s confirmed he’ll still be the walking, talking symbol of how men just don’t get it.”
Not just walking and talking, but VOTING, as a SC Justice, along predictable Republican partisan lines, just like Clarence Thomas has done for more than 25 years. Do you really think guys like Kavanaugh, Thomas, McConnell, or Trump care about how NYT opinion writers see them? This is about winning, not all that defining-cultural-moment stuff. DiFi gets that, God bless her.
1
I just shiver to think about a high school party, present day, where some drunk young man is weighing the option of doing the unspeakable, and feeling permission to do it because Kavanaugh got away with it and is now on the highest court in the country. And Trump got away with it and is now the president. I mean, really, Republicans need to take a look in the mirror and ask themselves if this is who they want to be.
1
That a judge and his supporters do not want an investigation and his accusers do tells you everything you need to know. How twisted and sick will Republicans become before we shut them down at the voting booth?
1
Thank you, Mr. Stephens, for the best description of Ted Cruz ever.
3
Kavanaugh is known to have lied when considered for his current judgeship. The Republicans are hiding over 100,000 pages of documents about Kavanaugh. He was obsessed with conspiracy theories when working with Ken Starr. He is a past heavy drinker and drinking until blacking out can cause permanent brain damage. He was a quarter-of-a-million dollars in credit card debt until it "mysteriously" disappeared after Trump nominated him. He appears to have a gambling problem.
If Kavanaugh never touched a woman in his life, he still isn't fit to be a Supreme Court judge.
4
Supreme Court lifetime appointments started when life expectancy was under 40 years! It is absurd to continue at this rate. Who wants a 105 year old Justice who is probably physically impaired in some way, if not mentally slower than when appointed? Give each one 20 years and a big thank you retirement check.
3
I don't agree with Mr. Stephens when he says the high school and the Yale events are mere accusations. These women say they were there and experienced the abuse. You may decide one or both of them are mistaken or liars, but you can't say there is not sufficient evidence. The eyewitness testimony of a lone victim of crime has resulted in thousands of people being convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. It simply depends upon whether the fact-finder credits the witness or not.
3
Gail is unduly optimistic about the likelihood of President Trump accepting defeat for re-election. The only way he will ever leave the White House is feet first.
1
As always, the conversation between these two was reasonable. But I wish Ms. Collins had asked whether he agrees that the investigation should include testimony from Mr. Judge. If, as he has suggested in the past, he believes that the letter from Mr. Judge asserting a lack of recollection was adequate, the next question would be whether he knows of any investigation of alleged assault where the investigators declined to question a person who was identified as being present when the assault took place simply because of an untested assertion made in a letter.
2
Fun fact: prisons are full of people who "didn't do it." Turns out denying a crime isn't a real defense. I actually learned that prior to law school, but I feel like it's something you'd definitely learn in law school.
8
Glad to see Bret have an open mind about investigating the accusation. His argument that only one of the two (Dr. Ford vs. Kavanaugh) is speaking the truth. The lie, either way, is heinous. An investigation by FBI should be welcome to unearth as many relevant facts as expeditiously as possible. I dunno why the conversation is not centered around the question of which of the two is not being truthful.
As for Ms. Ramirez case, there is at least a corroborating opinion from Kavanaugh's freshman roommate.
2
The most important action that could take place in this imbroglio would be an FBI investigation. Of course, that won't happen. Our lame public officials prefer to just assume their own set of facts depending on their partisanship and go with that.
4
It’s another switcheroo between the parties. Now Republicans are sex positive for teens and Democrats are the scolds.
3
There is no such thing as a short novena. Just saying.
3
Thank you for this wonderful part of your newspaper. I always perk up when I see it. It is a minor refuge of sanity, decency and skepticism.
I don't think Trump will care much about inconsistency. He will happily use the NY Times story to get rid of Rosenstein, and still call the NY Times fake news in the same press conference.
We don't have to decide on who is telling the truth. A credible allegation--that is, the merest likelihood that events might have transpired as Blasey Ford has described them--should permanently disqualify Kavanaugh.
This is a job application, not a criminal trial. Our standard for Supreme Court justices should be extraordinarily high. Nobody is entitled to be a Supreme Court justice, just as nobody is entitled to rape another human being.
And that is the central point of the controversy.
The old white Trump Republican men on the committee still believe it is no big deal if a white wealthy private-school Ivy League young man attempts to rape an under-age girl (a felony).
Their argument is "boys will be boys." "The girl doesn't matter." "The young man is entitled."
8
@Robert We don't have to decide who is telling the truth because this is a job interview? No one is entitled to rape, but no one is entitled to maliciously slander either, and even White people who went to Ivy league schools deserve better than this.
@William Powell
Thank you for your reply, William. The accusation is credible. For instance, she told others about what happened before anybody knew that Trump would be president or Kavanaugh would be nominated. Most victims of sexual assault never receive justice, and most perpetrators of sexual assault are never brought to justice. Most victims only report the crime decades after the fact if at all. Because the accusation is credible, it deserves a thorough investigation. Without that, all we will have are probabilities. The merest likelihood that Kavanaugh might have done this should permanently disqualify him. Nothing about the accusation looks like malicious slander.
My first comment concerns the crisis facing Rod Rosenstein, and by extension the fate of the Mueller investigation, a crisis whose proximate cause is an editorial decision of the NYT: The printing of the article about Rosenstein's consideration of wearing a wire and of invoking the 25th Amendment. Predictably, printing the piece seems likely to provoke the easily manipulated Trump to fire Rosenstein, thus hastening the end of the Mueller investigation. I expect far better of the NYT. I'm disappointed that Collins and Stephens did not address this editorial decision, helping me to understand the thus-far incomprehensible.
Second, I respond to Bret Stephens' comments regarding the veracity of Dr. Christine Blasi Ford, both in this column and in his column last week. (Lest I be charged with deliberately withholding my comments on the earlier column in service of some nefarious goal in timing them for today, I will point out that the earlier column was closed for comments when I read it.) Mr. Stephens questioned the validity of Dr. Ford's decades' old memory of the attempted rape. He and infinite others disingenuously question the possibility of such vivid memory over decades, ignoring the body of scientific evidence supporting it--including a piece by Dr. Richard Friedman, a psychiatrist with extensive experience in the field, that appeared the same week as Mr. Stephens'. Omitting these experts from political discussions grappling with the issue perpetuates the ignorance.
"Not fair, Gail. The fate of the Republic versus my self-respect," says Stephens.
No, it is not your self-respect at risk, Bret. It is your party (or religion) (or Israel) over country and Constitution. That is the choice you reframed to make it sound so innocent.
How telling that he cannot disavow Cruz immediately when asked the question. He has to think about it. And that answer has become the tell-tale mark of a repub party hack.
Stephens is just another Patriot In Name Only. But republican for life.
1
Man I miss Obama the adult.
12
Gail, what is a short novena to the Blessed Mother? Being a Jesuit trained Catholic Apostate/Apologist, a novena is 9 somethings. Rosaries, Masses, Set of Prayers, iterations of self-flagellation and so on. A short novena might be, Mary, pray God smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil, smite the evil...and even that is boring. Or, of course, making the 9 First Fridays...those were the days. To quote Jeremy Irons as Alfred The Justice League, "Remember when all we had to worry about was exploding penguins?"
1
Best description of Ted Cruz I've ever read.
9
Supreme Corruption, Collusion, Delusion, Confusion
Welcome to Trump's America!
Making America Crazy, Cruel, Chaotic, and Creepy again!
Voice your concerns, and Vote your conscience on Nov. 6
1
"Kavanaugh , a rich naughty boy drunken left a young girl with traumatic memories for good" ------ something like that Gail said, well said. In this Me Too movement era , lot of big fish had to quit lucrative jobs. Even FOX TV had to say good bye to Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly. Les Moonves, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, Mark Halpern, Senator Franken and so many had to quit or ousted. Only exception is the Supreme Court where Clarence Thomas still has the job and another accused sexual predator is going to join. Of course , our president is also an accused sexual predator.
1
Gotta love Rafael Cruz's complete lack of self-reflection, going after Beto for changing his name...
3
how about these 2 debate NYT's decision to publish the Rosenstein bombshell? Commenters agree, NYT may have gotten Mueller fired, kinda like Comey's similar self-aggrandizing moralism got trump elected.
Since Ted Cruz is universally despised as a sleazy con man worse than Trump, what does that say for the Texans that vote for him?
1
Somebody should write a book about politics by sex scandal — Anthony Weiner, Elliot Spitzer, Clarence Thomas, Bill Clinton, Gary Hart, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson. Grover
Cleveland, John Kennedy, Wilbur Mills, Barney Frank, Robert Packwood, John Edwards and Al Franken.
I hate how people say Kavanaugh's life will be ruined if he doesn't get this seat on the Supreme Court. Was Garland's life ruined? Did Garland go whining on network news about simply wanting a fair process?
This is tremendously revealing of Kavanaugh's character. Can he act more entitled? Can he act more ambitious? This level of ambition is fine in a politician running for office, but for the Supreme Court, or any court, I expect a lot more decorum.
A politician says vote for me and I will deliver such-and-such. This seems to be Kavanaugh's attitude, like he is the only one who can deliver on the Supreme Court- but that is inappropriate for a judge or justice. What promises is he planning on delivering? That only he can deliver and not any other conservative? It isn't Roe. All the justices on the short list could deliver on Roe. I have a terrible feeling it is a presidential get-out-of-jail-free card.
If Kavanaugh put the country or the Court above himself, he would withdraw his nomination and save us from this spectacle. I do not want to know when a Supreme Court Justice lost his virginity. Once you get into that territory, it is game over for anyone with any decency.
The fact that he is pushing so hard to put himself first is a disqualifying character flaw. His life will not be ruined. He has lifetime tenure on a federal bench. He is collecting a salary right now while applying for a new job. Most Americans can't be certain they will have a job at all next year.
17
The problem for Kavanaugh is not guilt or innocence. It's that the Republicans can always find another judge to take away women's reproductive rights but they cannot replace all the female voters they will lose with Kavanaugh. As Marco likes to say, it's all political calculation.
1
Here is the exchange that sums up the Orwellian nature of this Kavanaugh case, and how -- for progressives terrified of a conservative Supreme Court -- the truth is inconsequential compared to the objective of ruining him:
"What kind of evidence would persuade you that Kavanaugh is being truthful?
Gail: Well, if somebody else appeared and said, “No, I was the one who molested that girl — Brett was in the other room passed out in front of the fireplace,” I’d expect the committee to listen."
Note - the issue of whether the woman is even accurately remembering the alleged assault from 36 years ago, or whether Kavanaugh was even at the party, or whether her motives might have more to do with strident political activism than unburdening herself of a long-suppressed pain, is off the table. Without corroboration, her story MUST be accepted as true beyond any doubt -- with the possible exception of a bizarre mistaken identity.
This is how far progressives are willing to stray from the basic principles of fairness and justice they pay lip service to when it is convenient for them.
4
@Philboyd Absolutely. And now it seems that anyone having the audacity to go to private schools, and an Ivy Leage college, is inherently unfit to do much of anything.
About Ted Cruz, the guy has one line: 'I love guns'. Unfortunately, that's a great line if you live in Texas because, well, we love our guns. Fortunately, there are a million and one other issues, starting with ag, healthcare, and education, where Ted comes across as a tool of the 1% and Beto comes across as the hero of the common man.
Beto definitely has a chance if he just keeps getting out there, meeting regular folks, and listening to what we want from government. I've seen Beto yard signs everywhere from rural Llano county all the way to the suburbs where I live in Williamson county. Not many Democrats could accomplish that in Texas. I love it.
2
I disagree with Bret Stephens on a majority of issues, but, damn, his description of Ted Cruz was a thing of beauty.
12
I grew up in an Irish Catholic suburb, and I do not dismiss the fact that Kavanaugh is Irish Catholic. My sense is that the stereotype of the Irish as beer drinkers is more than a little true. And I would treat the alcohol as more of a factor in the alleged abuse.
My friends and I drank ourselves into oblivion on many Saturday nights. The memory of many of those nights were faded or nonexistent. When the issue is what was remembered the alcohol seems front and center. The fact that the alcohol is little discussed seems wrong to me.
7
Agreed. 'Cuz whatever you do when you are knee-walking drunk shouldn't be counted against you. @michjas
As much as this investigation/hearing is about whether or not Ford is telling the truth, the more important part is whether or not Kavanaugh is lying, or even lacking candor. And, this might not be the only lie--there's still the issue of his answers to questions in previous confirmation hearings, regarding how he came into possession of documents stolen from Senate Democrats by Manny Miranda, and whether or not he knew it at the time, or later learned of it prior to his confirmation hearings.
3
An investigation by the FBI is necessary to get more honest responses from those people present at the parties that Dr. Ford and Ms. Ramirez attended. 'I don't remember', 'I wasn't there', 'He was only ever a complete gentleman' just doesn't cut it.
Without sworn legal testimony, these alumni buddies both men and women are unlikely to break the bond of trusted silence. 'What happened at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep.' The bonds forged way back when amongst these wealthy elite students, last for life. Their lives depend on them. They have each others backs and would not dare betray those who can to this day have a huge negative influence on their lives - the well being of their families, social status, access to schools, career progression and more. Simply put, alumni don't rat each other out.
Lying to investigative journalists is not a crime. Lying to the FBI is.
6
@Maggie "An investigation by the FBI is necessary to get more honest responses from those people present at the parties that Dr. Ford and Ms. Ramirez attended."
I agree. I'm pretty sure the FBI can use waterboarding in cases like this. Some forms of electric shock might work too.
I really wish Ms. Collins would have answered Mr. Stephens' question about what kind of evidence is necessary to prove Kavanaugh's innocence. I oppose Kavanaugh's appointment for many reasons, the most important of which is that he has been credibly accused of sexual assault. But I recognize that "credibly accused" does not equal "proven guilty of" and I need to be open minded enough to accept the possibility he is innocent. If he is, how will we know? It is difficult to prove a negative and there is no evidence to refute beyond Blasey's (very plausible) version of the event.
5
You are right, you can’t prove a negative unless you got a solid alibi which may be difficult after 36 years. Hence the importance of a complete investigation with sworn statements. The charges will have substantiating evidence or they won’t. It may not amount to enough for a criminal conviction but it should be enough to allow the senators to decide whether to offer him the job or not.
2
@Nathan I hadn't thought of it before, but Kavanaugh could just say that he was vacationing in Brazil at the times of the alleged incidents, perhaps studying the bossa nova. This would be harder for Ford's, since there doesn't seem to be a definitive time attached to her accusation. This defense would be at least as plausible as the accusations.
The wonderful thing is, for the last thousand or so years of English common law, the accused do not have to prove they are innocent. The accuser has to prove guilt.
We need the highest judges in the land to be above suspicion. "Above suspicion: "in such a position that no guilt may be thought or implied, esp through having an unblemished reputation."
Therefore, Kavanaugh should, under NO circumstances, be confirmed. Simple as that.
11
The "burden of proof" is on the Judiciary Committee. The Committee's duty is to be as thorough as possible in assessing the qualifications of any prospective justice. Given that there is at least a consensus that more work needs to be done before voting his candidacy out of the Committee (notwithstanding the fact that some members have already decided to vote for or against Kavanaugh), nearly everyone's wishes could be met within two weeks (e.g. additional FBI investigation; subpoenas for witnesses; additional documentation). A Senate vote on October 10 should be reasonable. Given Kavanaugh's "performance" on Fox, I would think he would like additional "rehearsal" time and the old Republican men on the Committee would like more prep time to help avoid embarrassing themselves.
1
I really feel that Bret is holding back on his true opinions of Ted Cruz. I mean, he's coming close to explaining how the vast majority of Americans feel about Cruz, and I appreciate the accuracy of the description; however I really feel there's more to it.
10
Bret has definitely cornered Gail by asking her what it would take to convince her of Kavanaugh’s innocence. Her answer is typical of the political polarization that controls the left’s reaction to this episode: she would need irrefutable proof from HIM (or whoever was the perpetrator), because she believes the accuser despite the lack of any corroboration.
Let’s make it clear: the standard for evidence needed to establish guilt varies from a criminal trial to a civil trial to the court of public opinion. However, what they all have in common is the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof on the accuser, not the accused.
The Republicans should have thought twice before rejecting Judge Garland’s nomination by denying him a hearing; they now get payback from the Democrats. In the same way, Democrats should be careful with rejecting Kavanaugh’s nomination through character assassination, subverting the principles of determining guilt in the court of public opinion. The flip side of the coin is never too far.
1
What would it take? How about an FBI investigation?
1
Mr. Stephens critique of Ted Cruz was so right-on-the-money that I found myself laughing out loud. It should be made into lawn signs and sent to every voter in Texas. And Texas would be a "purple" state if the institutional voter suppression that Cruz depends on could be overcome.
15
Bret.
How did it feel to let loose and tell us what you 'really' think about Ted 'the Vaselined serpent' Cruz?
See how much fun it is being a Democrat, if only for a moment or two.
It makes Gail's life so much more fun as she gets to render such descriptions to most pols in your Party twice a week.
You should really give some thought to 'conversion therapy', but not the type previously offered by Michelle Bachman's husband.
7
An entitled handful of elite, entitled white boys get angry because they aren't getting what they think they are owed as quickly as they want, so they forcibly try to steamroll through to get it no matter the cost.
Assault or confirmation process? Is there any difference in M.O.?
15
We live in the age of dysfunctional, delusional, divisive, dishonest, corrupt and suicidal free press.
They indeed work extremely hard to divide, polarize and ruin this country.
If it happens, they are going to blame the people for such a terrible outcome.
1
@Kenan Porobic
Are you suggesting we should do away with the free press and free speech? It sounds like you are describing Trump and the rest of the deplorable Repubs!
I though Supreme Court Justices were supposed to be of unassailable good character, not caricatures of boozy frat boys and mysoginistic jocks who brag of sexual exploits in their prep school yearbooks.
13
This psycho-circus of an Administration careens on and on, each week crazier than the one before. Meanwhile, who is doing the quotidian work to keep the country running? Anyone?
4
I keep saying this: Follow the money.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/the-many-mysteries-of-brett...
1
This is the best conversation between Bret and Gail in a while. As many others have said, membership in the supreme court is a privilege, not a right. And even if Judge Cavanaugh went back to the appeals court, it’s not like he’s going to be emptying septic tanks for the rest of his life. I did love Bret’s take on Rafael Cruz and his situational ethics. My cornflakes went into the keyboard.
14
Bret’s description of Ted Cruz sounds like the typical Republican.
13
We are headed to: (1) Amy Coney Barrett will be the next Supreme Court Justice and (2) Rosenstein will be fired after the mid-terms.
1
When I looked up and saw an NBC news clip of the Fox Kavanaugh interview my first thought, and it was immediate, was that I was seeing a Bill and Hillary remake.
1
We have a kakocracy ruled by a kakocrat who demeans women but ogles his own daughter and now doubles down on his choice for a Justice who groped and gagged a minor. Republicans are game and follow this madman. How much lower can this country get?!
15
The most dangerous, grease coated creature that slithers and hisses through the halls of government is Mitch McConnell. Cruz, and even trump do not hold a candle to this man.
31
Also, I must mention the “ interview “ of Kavanaugh and Wife on GOP TV, i.e. FOX. Atrocious, demeaning and typical. For HER. Did anyone else feel they were watching a hostage video ???
Madam, I feel sympathy for you. It must be horrible to discover you’re married to a sexual assaulter. Allegedly. But don’t debase yourself, or your Children. Show some spine.
If not now, When ???
10
Will the Army of Testifiers, all 65 & all women, show for the hearings? How & why did that preternaturally staging get hatched? Mitch, envisioning a Dali-esque meltdown?
2
Cruz is the most un-Texan Texan I've ever seen.
7
He’s a Canadian - about as far as you can get from Texas in North America.
1
@Maxie-- Canada hates him,and SURE doesn't acknowledge him as Canadian.
The one thing the Supreme Court needs the very most it will never ever get: an atheist to teach its parochial school punks what an "establishment of religion" is, and why Congress is prohibited to enact any such thing into laws.
13
We really have the most incompetent journalism.
They think this is a story about Brett Kavanaugh.
They have no idea that we are witnessing the colossal problem of epidemic proportions caused by deteriorating social morality - that was engineered by the media outlets and the Hollywood…
Our journalism always protect the advertisers with deep pockets so they blame the teenagers for all the tragic consequences.
They should drink and drink and drink, but not take that very last shot because it pushed them over the edge?!
The problem with the drinking is identical to the stock bubble. You never know when the bubble is going to burst or your brain get incapacitated by the alcohol…
1
Thank you, thank you, I love these conversations, and I needed the laugh. Ted Cruz will most likely win in November because hispanic Americans didn't turn out in sufficient numbers. It just goes to prove that ideology makes us blind and stupid.
2
For Trump haters like me, the ideal way for this to go is for Ford to seem more sympathetic than Kavanaugh (a given in light of his grotesquely phony Fox stunt last night), then the Republicans ram him through anyway (perfect metaphor, no?), then the Republicans lose both houses of Congress, then Avenatti forces the Montgomery Co. police to indite Kavanaugh for gang rape, then he's removed from the Court and sent to play checkers with Cosby for many years.
7
Kavanaugh is a liar. He lies about things big and small, certainly in order to advance his career, but maybe for other reasons too. He lies about emails and documents. He lies about places he has been. He lies about his actions with women--even horrible things he has done to them. We cannot have a sexual abuser on the Supreme Court. But we cannot have a habitual liar either. Epic fail for the GOP on this one. And their continued rallying around this gross and creepy man (at the expense of some very traumatized women no less) makes me look forward to voting a solid Democratic ticket in November. I say this as a former registered Republican.
8
I'm surprised, and frankly shocked to see the Brett Kavanaugh fiasco described by Gail as being about sex. Rape is never about sex. It's about power.
141
@Liz: In the case of Kavanaugh, it was also about peer pressure and showing off for his friend.
4
@Liz Sexual power, if you like: but of course it's always about sex! The "not about sex, but power" saying that you quoted, a recent invention, is wrong because it treats a "both-and" case as an "either-or" situation.
A man who rapes, wants the sexual experience to relieve a sexual urge, however temporary. This is so elemental.
@Liz Yes, in this case it is completely about power, namely political power, as well as the power of the mob to rob us of our legal protections. You may hate Kavanaugh for political reasons, but the protections the left would like to strip him of protect us all. I am sure that if an important man in your life was accused of a sexual crime without any evidence, you would be thrilled with his presumption of innocence. You should apply the same standards to Judge Kavanaugh. Anything else is un-American.
Best takedown of Cruz ever! Though insulting to snakes.
14
Bret,
If your classical music critic wife had come up with similar allegations as Ms. Ramirez, would you be as blasé as you are in this conversation?
4
@Blunt Spouses and family members or even friends are not impartial 3rd parties. Imagine if society did act like every accuser was a member of their family. How many innocent people would be put away without a second thought? You don’t expect for those close to you to be objective. Society as a whole though has a duty to remain objective.
4
@John: sorry but this is not what objectivity means. Plus the concept of societal objectivity is just verbiage. It is like a social welfare function, it does not exist in any consistent form as Kenneth Arrow showed a while ago (and won the Nobel Prize for it).
The Rosenstein revelation is a gift that will keep on giving. The Mueller investigation is on the rocks as long it is headed by someone so "deepstate" implicated. Trump needs such a dark figure hovering around the investigation to sow doubt and confusion, and the longer he does, the more inflamed the notion that we are witnessing a shadowy conspiracy will become. This is, after all, a contest of polls, and the trick is to make it so complicated that the masses will clamor to be rid of it. A fatal misstep, against so cunning an adversary. Ironic, that the New York Times should be the one to come to the President's rescue here. But a scoop is a scoop, and it was undoubtedly hawked elsewhere.
Even despicable Ted Cruz can't make Trump "look like a human being by comparison." They're both serpents covered in too much hair product, equally detestable, morally bankrupt.
Apologies to the United Nations for the dark cloud and fog enshrouding Manhattan today. It's a metaphor for the hypocrisy just sputtered at the assembly. Please be patient as we work to remedy the situation in 2018 and 2020.
VOTE.
12
Bret's characterization of Ted Cruz should be put in the Hall of Fame for accuracy and humor. Loved it!
8
Regarding Mr Rosenstein's alleged musings about making recordings of interactions with Mr Trump, was it not the case that right around that time there was some dispute about what, exactly, Trump said to Mr Comey on a couple of occasions? And isn't there some reason to suspect that Trump is either profoundly dishonest about his own words and deeds, or else astonishingly forgetful? So far from being a scandalous notion of Mr Rosenstein's part, anyone having any kind of conversation with Mr Trump, even if it is only getting an opinion about the weather, would be well advised to record it.
Case in point: Omarosa has recordings of Trumpish utterances which flatly contradict his assertions—not that that's any surprise.
3
This has never really been about whether or not these women are credible or honest in their accounts. I'm not sure their credibility matters to the men in charge here, nor Mr. Stephens. Even if we had the best evidence ever, they would not be convinced this man was not fit. This will boil down to whether the men in charge fully understand that the alleged behavior, the constellation of sexist behavior (including yearbook "jokes" at a single woman's expense) is NOT ACCEPTABLE, not from a teen, not from an adult and certainly not a Supreme Court justice. Even if these brave women never stepped forward, I would be highly concerned about all the other misbehavior reported from the yearbook slights to heavy drinking and palling around with a mentor now under investigation for sexual harassing females. This is not the person I want on the court. There are too many well-qualified people who have don't have these blemishes on their records.
9
I don't understand this "let's be fair" and he is innocent until proven guilty stance taken by so many conservatives. To not believe a woman who says she has been sexually assaulted is not being "even handed", it is being brazenly contemptuous of women.
Does anyone really believe that a woman would come forward and make these kinds of accusation, expose herself and her family to the accusations and shaming that is sure to follow, if they were not true. There are a remarkably few number of cases where false accusations have been made against men, and the motivation for that is usually easily discovered and proven. On the other hand, there is also a remarkably few number of cases where a man who has clearly violated a woman is actually punished.
Given the shamefully high percentage of women who have been and continue to be sexually assaulted and abused in this country, I'd say "fair" would be that a women has a right to be believed until proven wrong and the "innocent until proven guilty" standard be reserved for courtrooms where experts who have been trained in these types of assaults have done a thorough investigation and weighed in.
A significant decline in the number of assaults is the only legitimate measure of whether or not society's response is "even handed," and by that measure we have a long way to go.
3
Bret, I do hope you save this article to reread in your old age. The last little bit about Cruz is both hysterical and deadly accurate.
If there is hope for the Repubican Party after Trump and Cruz and...oh I don't know, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louie_Gohmert)
...it is the hope that the Republicans adopt your spirit and courage. And that comes from a super lefty.
Hugh
3
Kavanaugh is not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court because the so called president who is appointing him is not qualified for his office; and was probably installed there by Putin.
Throw in the un Constitutional act of McConnell refusing to grant a hearing to Merrick Garland and the web of deceit is fully exposed.
His handling of the immigrant 16 year old seeking a legal abortion is another reason for him to be denied.
Add his work for Ken Starr's inquisition of Clinton and then his u turn that presidents just shouldn't be bothered with the niceties of the law another strike against.
Whether he tried to rape Dr. Ford or manhandle, her his insistence that he did nothing wrong says all that needs be said about his morality and ethics.
Kavanaugh is the pick of the koch bothers, not t rump, and no one can think it a good idea that our Supreme Court become the judicial arm of koch industries.
2
POLYGRAPH, POLYGRAPH, POLYGRAPH!
Kavanaugh, as a lawyer, knows how effective and accurate lie detectors are which is why he wants nothing to do with any POLYGRAPH tests about his past.
Once again, if kavanaugh, a former AWOL bush lawyer, were a decent man, charles and david koch would have ordered president bone-spurs to nominate someone else.
9
@Victorious Yankee - Lie detector tests are NOT "effective and accurate", as any good defense lawyer or prosecutor knows.
Should Kavanaugh get a pass for a teenage, high school, drunken indiscretion? Should Yale scholar Kavanaugh get a pass for his well known drunken belligerent behavior at college, possibly including sexual harassment of another student? Should brilliant law clerk Kavanaugh get a pass for being “clueless” about his mentor Judge Kuzinski’s widely known reputation as a serial sexual harasser? Should White House Presidential Secretary Kavanaugh get a pass for his use of stolen documents and other policy positions? Should respected jurist Kavanaugh get a pass for tormenting a pregnant teenager who wished to legally terminate an unwanted pregnancy?
Kavanaugh is not a sexual predator. But he not the person that is represented by his well honed image. He is not suitable to serve as a justice on the Supreme Court.
10
What no one ever mentions is that Nei Gorsuch, now on the Court and Kavanaugh now up for confirmation both attended Georgetown Prep at the same time .During the Gorsuch hearings there were no accusations of sexual assault.It is not a Democratic stunt that this information has come forward for this candidate.There are accusations now and the FBI is equipped to handle them.And Bret, a special shout out to you for your choice description of Ted Cruz, a bloviator we all love to hate! Go Beto!
4
Gail agreeing with Bret about the burden of proof re Kavanaugh galls me. This is not a trial. These are confirmation hearings. Analogies to criminal trials are inapt. Anyone who elicits several even moderately believable charges of this nature cannot be a Spreme Court Justice.
1
Gail seems to not only accept but endorse the current Orwellian justice process. Apparently you can be accused at any time; you must prove a negative; and every exculpatory fact such as no witness corroboration and delay in making a charge is alleged to be a factor in favor of the accuser. The irony of imposing this due process-less inquisition on a judge whose job is to protect due process seems lost on Gail and her friends.
Need we remind our rightist pals that Secretary Clinton, The Winner of The American People's Vote, was subjected to 9 televised Benghazi hearings and 2 FBI investigations prior to the election for a four year temp job with an option for four additional years.
Mr. kavanaugh is interviewing for a lifetime job and yet the repubs are balking at a single FBI investigation into his deviant past?
As president bone-spurs loves to say:
"If he did nothing wrong, he should have nothing to fear".
12
Who is withholding the truth; not the accusers of Brett Kavanaugh; just Brett Kavanugh and his supporters.
Withholding information is what the GOP in the Senate Judiciary
is currently doing; and for this reason alone....their candidate.
should be disqualified.
And this is the reason for voting these disingenuous office holders from office;...The GOP do NOT represent you or me...
they represent their campaign funders....their wealthy PacMasters...this is the dirtiest part of our US History.
so...what to do...vote for the overturn of Citizens United and
let us return to our republic as a representation of all our citizens...not just the wealthy few who dictate what their
paid for representatives have to say...those like Mitch McConnell...et al.
3
"The real issue is whether a respected judge can be held accountable for a drunken sexual assault he made as a teenager."
We keep discussing these hearings as if they are taking place in a court of law, but they aren't. Maybe the real issue is that we shouldn't be considering a candidate for the Supreme Court who cannot shake these allegations of inappropriate behavior. After all, the accusations leveled against Clarence Thomas did not include assault. The last three Republican nominees (Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch) coasted right through without any suspicions that they had committed any crimes. Have the Republicans really run out of clean candidates?
4
"But neither do I want to accept one in which mere accusation without substantial corroboration can destroy a person’s career and reputation."
Bret Stephens is repeating the same absurd notion advanced by Lindsey Graham and his ilk. Namely, that forcing a candidate for Supreme Court to withdraw is somehow commensurate with ruining his reputation, destroying his career, and sullying his name. No, it isn't. Kavanaugh will go back to doing what he has been doing for the past decade, serving as a federal judge with a lifetime appointment. Additionally, he will likely be a hero to the far right and undoubtedly receive a lucrative book deal and speaking engagements. The suggestion that if the hearings don't result in his confirmation he will be the victim is not only absurd; it is utterly contemptible.
2
Thank you for a breath of fresh humorous yet serious commentary in a smelly political situation.
1
Who should have their career ruined, Bret Stephens?
3
Donald Trump is my first choice, for the record.
2
Funny how the Democrats would say that an accusation of Sexual Misconduct with zero evidence and zero proof by a person who refuses to testify about it should ruin the carreer of a politician just because he is a GOP candidate. But 26 years ago they voted for a President who left a trail of sexual misconduct that couldn't be ignored (and went on well into his presidency). And then, 2 years ago, they would vote for Hillary CLinton who helped cover up most of these sexual misconducts and made them possible.....
1
A thoughtful and thorough evaluation of Ted Cruz by Mr. Stephens. Well done. The only possible way to make Cruz sympathetic is to remember how Trump treated him during the presidential campaign. Which now vividly demonstrates the conveniently malleable ethics of both men.
14
If Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed, it will not be a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, that will be gone. He will be just one more Republican judge on the Republican Court, a completely different animal.
Everybody knows that he is being put on the court to write the opinion overturning Roe and re-establishing the punishment pregnancy as a way to control women's sexuality and remove their autonomy.
That sort of thing will be the new normal. Decisions will be made by Republicans and sent to the Republican Court where suitable cases will be found to announce those decisions and to write them into law.
Perhaps I'm being too cynical, but I don't see how the country can survive that.
6
"Because he’s like a serpent covered in Vaseline. Because he treats the American people like two-bit suckers in 10-gallon hats. Because he sucks up to the guy who insulted his wife — by retweet, no less. Because of his phony piety and even phonier principles. Because I see him as the spiritual love child of the 1980s televangelist Jimmy Swaggart and Jack Nicholson’s character in “The Shining.” Because his ethics are purely situational. Because he makes Donald Trump look like a human being by comparison. Because “New York values.” Because his fellow politicians detest him, and that’s just among Republicans. Because he never got over being the smartest kid in eighth grade. Because he’s conniving enough to try to put one over you, but not perceptive enough to realize that you see right through him. Because he’s the type of man who would sell his family into slavery if that’s what it took to get elected. And that he would use said slavery as a sob story to get himself re-elected."
Bravo, Bret Stephens! There should be a Pulitzer Prize for this sort of thing!
27
I still don't understand the problem with insisting on an FBI investigation and why the committee can't make it a prerequisite that Kavanaugh take a lie detector test. The whole thing smells of trump's manipulation.
15
@Steve -- lie detectors don't detect lies. They are pseudoscience -- not valid or reliable. Ford knows that as she is a psychologist and the psych literature is very clear on that issue.
As for an FBI investigation -- fine -- delay some more. Feinstein had 6 weeks to ask for an investigation.
1
All any FBI "investigation" of a 35 year old allegation can tell us is that she thinks it happened, he says it didn't and the FBI can't prove it either way. Now, if you really want to get to the heart of things, allow the FBI full access to the democrat Senators and staff emails, particularly Feinstein's staff. But of course, such transparency would be denied.
1
Gail Collins is brilliant and funny. Able to find common ground with almost anyone, she captures everything wrong with Brett Stephens in her last question to him. After Stephens extensively venting on how irredeemably evil Ted Cruz is, Collins closes by asking: 'If the deciding vote on all these things you don’t like was going to be the Senator from Texas, who would you want it to be — the highly principled and sincere Democrat Beto O’Rourke or a certain Republican slimy snake?
Bret: Not fair, Gail. The fate of the Republic versus my self-respect. Let me answer that in our next conversation."
It's more than fair. Stephen's trying to deflect by pretending it's a bit of joke which he will address next time because he's out of time, (which means he'll address it). It's telling. This is precisely the same exact way that Stephens deals with Trump. He rails against him, but when it comes down to it he consistently backs most of the things Trump does. Further, Stephens backs all of the things Trump does, no matter how terrible, as long as Congressional Republicans want them, even as they are destroying the Republic by enabling and protecting Trump in order to accomplish them. Stephens says he despises Ted Cruz because, "his ethics are purely situational." Unfortunately, this is true of Brett Stephens too. His criticisms of both Trump and Cruz are meaningless. Given the chance to defend the Republic and American Democracy, Stephens chooses loyalty to party every single time.
9
If Kavanaugh said "I don't remember that this happened, but I am very, very sorry if it did" and there was no pattern of further bad behavior, then I might be willing to give his 17-year old self a second chance. But he didn't say that. He says it never happened. Because I, too, believe Blasey Ford, this means Kavanaugh is a liar and we don't need anymore of them in power.
17
I'm going to cut out the Ted Cruz analysis and put that in my back pocket for whenever the topic comes up. Is it too much to put on a campaign yard sign?
15
I would love to see someone ask Kavanaugh questions in the form he developed to
If I was to ask your Yale freshman roommate if you had a serious drinking problem and he said yes, would he be lying?
If I was to ask your Yale Law School classmates if you had a serious drinking problem and any one of them said yes, would they be lying?
If I was to ask Mark Judge if he was present during a party where you were alleged to have sexually assaulted Dr. Ford, and he said no, would he be lying?
if anybody has any suggestion how to make these questions more graphic - along the lines Kavanaugh himself articulated in his questions for President Clinton - please feel free to add them here.
6
Bret did an unusually good job of providing reasons to despite Ted Cruz. But Al Franken's lines remain my favorite:
I like Ted Cruz more than anybody else in the Senate.... and I hate Ted Cruz.
19
Gail, if only you could be on the Supreme Court. Or President. This rain cloud over my head would finally disappear. If only.
7
Would you let your daughter go to a sleepover with that allegation hanging over a household?
How would you feel about such a person continuing to coach your girl's team?
For the sake of his children he should clear this up. I can't imagine the cruel stares, whispers, and taunts within an all girls school.
9
With all respect to Mr. Stephens, I hope it is about cultural shift. We have an enormous problem with alcoholism in this country, and it is much worse than the drug epidemic because our culture condones alcohol abuse and turns a blind eye to the consequences. I think both Blasey and Kavanaugh are likely telling the truth- he raped her, and he doesn't remember because of the alcohol. So then what? Can we ever excuse being drunk for someone's behavior? But so often, we do. And as long as we do, we are tacitly condoning the consequences. This is really much, much bigger than these two people.
7
The problem with Bret Stephens' argument is that Brett Kavanaugh is not a credible witness. There is good reason to believe he doesn't remember the event. Even if he does remember the event, he has a clear motivation to misrepresent the event. On top of that, he is repeatedly known to misrepresent his actions under oath. The man is not credible. No one can say the same thing about Dr. Blasey.
Every single scrap of context in this situation should compel a person not to testify. There is absolutely no upside for Dr. Blasey in coming forward with this accusation. However, she did. I'd be more casual discussing the fair weight of justice in Ramirez's claim. She's probably telling the truth but there's a good deal of uncertainty involved. Not so with Blasey. She knows what happened and she wants to tell the truth.
The sad part of course is Republicans, including Kavanaugh, are denying Blasey a fair opportunity to establish her truth. This is why I agree with Collins. If the truth were important to Senate Republicans, things wouldn't play out this way. We're witnessing politics, not justice. You're wasting breath by arguing for due process because due process is being actively suppressed. A narrative to the contrary is only an apology for the perpetrators. Stephens is making the partisan position sound reasonable even when the partisan actions are not. I find this distasteful.
3
Let's face it. Kavanaugh has been twice dipped in a pool of stink and may well be re-dipped. America cannot afford or even allow that stink to follow him into the seat of a Justice.
Guilty or innocent, the stink will remain. It could very well destroy his marriage. Just like his accusers, his life has been changed drastically (right or wrong) and he has to move away.
As for Ted Cruz, he's been dipped too and I would love to see him gone.
8
Since repubs weren't repulsed by the stink the electoral college president brought to the White House, I do not expect them to find kavanaugh's sexual assault any less acceptable in the Supreme Court.
6
Bret Stephens: Best take down of Ted Cruz ever. He's the guy we all wish we could slap the smugness out of.
16
I'd rather slap Donald Trump. But that's just me!
1
"Where are we headed now?"
That's easy. Kavanaugh will be confirmed. The "McConnell Court" will exude vast influence over us for the rest of our lives.
Oh, Roe v Wade will not be overturned.
2
Because I see him as the spiritual love child of the 1980s televangelist Jimmy Swaggart and Jack Nicholson’s character in “The Shining.
:) :) :)
22
Outstanding column today, both of you Folks. Actually gave me a chance to let out a calming deep breath. Sadly, my continuous, simmering anxiety shortly returned...
8
Amazing, I am in agreement with Mr Stephens: his description of Ted Cruz is spot on. Cruz is easily the most loathesome character in politics in America. And that is saying something given the guy in second position.
4
''Not fair, Gail. The fate of the Republic versus my self-respect.''
- And there you have an encapsulation of the republican party as a whole and how the ''base'' keeps voting against themselves.
There should be not one iota of deliberation, because (as you pointed out quite convincingly in your judgement of the person you were describing before that quote) the person does not deserve your vote just because they have an ''r'' beside their name on the ballot.
However, that is why we are in this political climate of today. Of course many (including you) will retort that this has been decades in the making to get to this point in American history, but the baseline has always been the same.
People (the republican base generally) put party over country.
8
Al Franken, when faced with the initial story about him, including backing evidence in the form of a photograph, was completely willing to face the Senate Ethics Committee and submit to its investigatory process. Once other stories emerged, he resigned his position.
Brett Kavanaugh, when faced with the initial story about him, including backing evidence in the form of therapist records from 2012 (years before Mr. Kavanaugh was, to my knowledge, ever mentioned publicly as a future SC justice), refused to submit to any further investigation. As other stories have emerged, he has refused to withdraw from consideration.
Just getting this in to compare behaviors, in case the "but both sides do it" folks are out and about today.
9
@C. Austin Hogan Regarding Al Franken, there was just the one incident when he was clowning around and put his hands on the armored vest of the sleeping woman and had a photo taken. There is absolutely no comparison.
4
@C. Austin Hogan Al Franken resigned under pressure and many in the Democratic Party still feel today as if he should have never resigned. Additionally, photographic proof is different from a notes from a therapy session.
1
Lets not forget that Franken's accuser has ties to Sean Hannity.
Very insightful conversation. But each and every time the Supreme Court nomination is discussed, a mention of the McConnell-Senate-Republican theft of the Scalia seat should set the context. Merrick Garland should be the nominee.
8
While I was still teaching, I heard about a candidate for community college president who had been interviewed, vetted, and had been made an offer. The hiring institution sent the hiring committee to the campus where the candidate worked, and it was only then that they heard about ongoing investigations into the candidate's conduct with women on his campus. The offer to hire was withdrawn immediately.
I can't believe that Mitch McConnell is still saying they need to "plow this through" the confirmation process. Instead, as a member of Congress who has sworn to uphold the Constitution, he should be asking the FBI to "plow through" an investigation and let them know what they come up with.
But seriously... I saw Mitch on TV yesterday calling this a "smear campaign." For more than half of the country Mitch has absolutely no credibility or gravitas. He lost that forever, if he ever had any to begin with, and should face charges for subverting the Constitution and not allowing Obama to name Scalia's replacement.
32
@furnmtz
I agree wholeheartedly with this judgment. I have a couple of things in common with McConnell: we are both native Kentuckians, and we both worked as student interns during the '60s for Kentucky's Republican Senator John Sherman Cooper. Cooper was conscientious, principled, and quite bi-partisan. When the young Democratic President-elect JFK arrived in DC, the first private dinner he attended was hosted by Senator and Mrs. Cooper. McConnell in direct contrast, is the very face of - and a driving force behind - today's cynical hyperpartisansip. And when another young Democratic President, Barack Obama, arrived in DC, Mitch openly said that his central mission would be to see that his Presidency would be a failure. I would love to tell Mitch to his face that, were he still here among us, our common mentor Senator Cooper would be appalled by the damage that Mitch has inflicted on the Senate and this country.
15
Dear Ms. Collins and Mr. Stephens,
Thank you for this latest exchange on our current State of affairs, and Mother Nature is weeping profusely this morning in this neck-of-the-woods. Floods.
'Bear', my mental and physical senior sibling, and I just had a taxing conversation about Napoleonic bureaucracy, and I forgot to ask whether he thought 'Wolf', my father would have been nominated to the Supreme Court. The former went to Harvard, the latter to Yale, and neither engaged in this kind of behavior that is being described in graphic detail.
'Bear' is happily married to a brilliant professor, and now retired, was more interested in raising the name of Rosenstein for a second, and his hearing-aid gave out when we resumed.
Cruz reminds this voter of a character in 'Let There be Blood', which I walked out of after 19 Minutes. Surrounded by Republicans here, and if asked about the News, 'Lively' is the word I shall use.
With appreciation for restoring a sense of reality, it is with regret that I inform you that the crickets, who are Republicans according to Ms. Collins, are drowning in this political cesspool.
'The Cricket in Times Square', a fine musician who brought with him good fortune to daily commuters who were downtrodden and tired, joins in sending you both best greetings for the new autumn season.
4
Wow! That was some spot-on description of Ted Cruz, Brett. I never thought I'll even begin to like you -- given your outdated and outrageous right-wing philosophical outlook and all the nonsensical rationalizations -- but now I see that I might be able to give you a slight chance of redeeming yourself. The question is: In what ways do you see the other Republicans differ from Ted Cruz? Is Mitch McConnell, to name just one, any different than Ted? If your answer to this last question is "No", then my next question is: Why do you choose to hang out with these guys and identify yourself with their Party? As for my dear Gail Collins: Oh my God! That last question of yours for Brett was delicious! It left him literally speechless!
10
"Gail: The Kavanaugh story is about sex..."
Not so: sexual assaults are all expressions of violence and power.
2
Bret, your analysis of Ted Cruz is priceless!
8
Enjoyable conversation...if it weren't about such ugly human elements on display, and the arrogance of some of those subjects when facing the truth. But the one that takes my vote for 'greased snake' is the unscrupulous self-serving Ted Cruz, an abomination as a politician and even as a human being. Cruz is so sneaky that even Trump (our brutus ignoramus in-chief, and a vulgar bully by choice) may be envious at his Machiavellian feat.
8
The public attitude of Republicans seems to be tailored at Fox. Is Hannity our Prime Minister? It's disgraceful in the extreme that these old GOP fossils pretend not to know the difference between remembering a remarkable event and an unremarkable one. For a 15-year old to have to fear imminent rape and death is remarkable, in America at least. For Kavanaugh and Judge, a night of drinking and "sport" was not remarkable--according to many accounts. I don't remember every glass of Chardonnay I've had. So I never had any?
14
It’s a message all young people need to hear. Behave in high school. Girls need to be respected at all times. If you make one unhappy, the Democrats will come at you like a ton of bricks for the rest of your life.
4
@Rick Girls also have to take responsibility for their actions. I am really sick and tired of women coming forward as victims. Why did they put themselves in vulnerable situation. I am speaking as a woman who dated many, many Yale guys when I was a student at Connecticut College and never, ever had the experience that Ramirez had. Maybe that is because I was not a player and looking for excitement. If you are looking for excitement, you will definitely find it. And please do not plead victimhood after it.
@Rick - Yes, but not for the rest of their lives. Just 'til the hearings are over.
The question is, why wouldn't the Republicans teach their kids the same lessons about conduct and respect?
Kavanaugh is lucky his school days were decades before Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Somebody (lots of somebodies) would have posted a thousand selfies and videos of themselves having "fun." That might've jogged his memory a bit... unless he declared it all to be part of the great Fake News conspiracy.
1
@Rick Only if you accomplish something and are put in a place of high national importance. Otherwise, no one will give it another thought and you will never be accused.
2
Last week Bret wrote that it was wrong for people to say: "I believe Blasey Ford." Instead, they should say: "I WANT to believe Blasey Ford."
Bret dipped his toes into the deep and murky waters of epistemology--highlighting the difference between believing and knowing.
I believe Blasey Ford, not Kava-naughty. Now what kind of sadistic monster would I have to be to WANT to believe she was sexually assaulted? It seems to be contradictory to assert that a person can firmly believe something without being able to prove it. But I don't, ahem, believe that.
Suppose you ask any ("most" would be safer, but heck, let's go for it) astrophysicist if she believes there is intelligent life somewhere else in the universe. She would certainly (notice I omitted "almost") answer in the affirmative. Then you say: "Prove it." She might respond: "That request is unfair. I don't have access to Area 51."
Then she would go on. "There are billions, perhaps trillions, of galaxies similar to ours out there, and given what I know about how stars and planets and solar systems work, I'm confident that a trillion light years from here an alien version of "I Love Lucy" is playing as we speak.
All that I know about human behavior, the emotional wreckage a sexual assault can create, the understandable reluctance to go public, sizing up the character and background of the accuser--all this makes me believe Blasey Ford, even though I know I--or anyone else--probably won't be able to prove it.
1
Best observation- this isn't only about sex it is also about class. Read the history of some of Kavanaugh's college exploits and his sense of entitlement virtually oozes between the lines of his statements. But it is also about sex. There is not chance that Kavanaugh will not become a SC Justice. But, this debacle, along with the hundreds of other recent "Me-Too" stories, may gradually have some impact on male privilege in America.
3
“But deep down, this isn’t really about whether Christine Blasey Ford is telling the truth….”
Sorry, yes it is.
There are people who can easily envision a scenario where she would lie.
For example:
* Dr. Blasey Ford is a psychology professor at a San Francisco bay area liberal arts college, a demographic not exactly known for their support of conservative Supreme Court justices.
* She is known to be a registered Democrat.
* She is known to have participated in anti Trump rallies.
* She is known to have participated in pro-abortion rallies.
* In 1984 she graduated from Holton-Arms, a girls prep school in Bethesda, MD.
* Judge Kavanaugh graduated from Georgetown Prep, also in Bethesda, in 1983.
*Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch graduated from Georgetown Prep in 1985.
* It is likely Dr. Blasey Ford knows Gorsuch as well as Kavanaugh.
* Pro-Abortion advocates like Dr. Blasey Ford are concerned Judge Kavanaugh will attempt to overturn Roe v Wade.
* Pro-Abortion advocates like Dr. Blasey Ford are concerned Judge Gorsuch will attempt to overturn Roe v Wade.
* If Kavanaugh is confirmed conservatives will have a strong majority on the court.
Sandwiched in between two justices in school, an active, pro-abortion advocate, registered democrat, liberal arts professor, it is not unfathomable that Dr. Blasey Ford sees herself as the last liberal hope for saving Roe.
Of course she should be heard, but it is not inconceivable she is lying.
5
Lets keep it simple. Trump needs Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh knows it, Kavanaugh needs to support an FBI investigation. Not doing so says I am guilty of the accusations. He wants fair treatment while at the same time is not supporting it for his accusers. None of this adds up to a suitable justice.
For what it is worth the fact that Trump says he is behind Kavanaugh and that he is a fantastic person is the equivalent of Charles Manson character witnessing for John Wayne Gacy.
9
Bravo to you Bret Stephens for your gorgeously accurate description of Ted Cruz. Now please turn those deadly writing skills to an analysis of why Mitch McConnell of the gimlet eye, the irritating, monotonous voice and the predictable, tight-lipped obstinacy towards anything reasonable proposed by anyone who opposes his positions on anything, continues to exert so much power in our government? The current crop of Republican leaders, starting with Donald Trump and his Vice President, on down, have the most unattractive, unappealing personal characteristics of any I have ever seen in my lifetime.
16
'A novena' - what a good idea! Go, Beto!
7
It's time to put political ideologies to bed. Mr. Stephens had to dodge an important question because his ideological footprint is seemingly out of synch with what he clearly knows is best for the country. To be honest, Ive reached the point where anyone who professes to be liberal or conservative loses credibility. It's no different than philosophical differences which are best understood but left in the classroom. It's time to take the blinders off and assess reality for what it is without filtering everything through political prisms.
1
Excellent article until the final answer. It was an easy answer for most people. You couldn't answer that one Bret?
11
Judging by the comments here, Trump was not successful if he intended to wipe the Kavanaugh story off the front of everybody's minds by raising a question about Rosenstein's future.
Might not have been a great idea to go with that Fox interview, Bill Shine, but it makes me feel better to know that while you guys are moral midgets, you aren't very smart.
9
If Professor Ford was a man and brett kavanaugh was a Catholic priest, every word of her 35 year old accusation would be believed.
27
A frightening week ahead for all of us, with the cliff-hanging hearings re Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's alleged sexual harassment of women and the possible firing by Trump of the Special Counsel's boss, Dep. A.G. Rod Rosenstein. Colossal ball of worms, nasty rat's nest, created by the G.O.P. in honour of their malign and demented leader, our president. Trump is ensconced on the horns of a dilemma the likes of which he has never seen.
Brett Kavanaugh won't withdraw from his coveted nomination to the Court, His confirmation hearing is now doomed by accounts of his transgressive sexual behaviour toward high-school and college women. If the G.O.P. Senate men's club crowns Judge Kavanaugh, his name will be as muddy as Clarence Thomas's was after Anita Hill's testimony in 1991. Equality for women is the real cultural transformation of our time.
1
If I may add one more reason to dislike Ted Cruz...
He will kiss Trump's ring, willingly and with gusto, no matter which appendage it is worn on, if he thinks it will get him re-elected...so he can again run for president.
Once he loses to Beto his political career is deader than an armadillo on I-35 in Dallas at 5 PM on a Friday afternoon.
9
The Kavanaugh nomination will boil down to class. Is the old, white, christian, entitled ruling class going to vote down one of its own? Or, will it find some way to approve his nomination without outraging most of the population?
Kavanaugh could be the poster boy for the these old white men. He entire upbringing reflects his privileged background. Sure, he was drunk during a lot of his youth but who wasn't? I can't see him losing this nomination unless he is offered a sweet deal to step down.
1
@Joseph Thomas His nomination isn't being challenged because he drank too much. He is accused of sexual assault.
Brett, we differ on a lot of things but you told it better than anyone ever has about Ted Cruz. SPOT ON! Imagine someone even more reprehensible and despicable than Donald Trump! At least Trump never pretends to be holier than thou! I am sending your detailed analysis of " Lying Ted" to everyone I know! Thank you for doing it way better and more articulately than I ever could.
3
I am searching for justice,
But I know I do not want this brand of it.
We have a brand of justice defined by the accident of birth.
A rich, white, 'American' gets a pass for an alleged sexual assault. With good connections they are offered a seat on the highest court in the land.
By a similar accident of birth a poor, white, American, for the same allegation, is tried, labeled a 'sex offender, forced to register with police, cannot hold a job, and is treated as an enemy of society, regardless of their repentance.
I do not know what justice is.
I know I do not want this brand of it.
2
Thanks Gail for giving away the store. Dr. Ford makes an allegation that has no corroboration, that is not supported by any of the eyewitness she claims. Yet you will believe it unless an absolutely conclusive confession by someone else occurs. Even if all sorts of evidence comes in undermining her story comes in, you’re going to believe her. In other words, you don’t care about evidence or facts. You want to believe her and will unless it becomes impossible not to. You don’t just believe in guilty until proven innocent. You believe in guilty, no proof required or paid attention to.
As Bret said: This is not a trial.
It should be treated as a job interview.
I was on a lot of search committees at my university and the first thing is you would not consider only one candidate for a position, especially for a top position. Better if Trump submitted 3-5 names, and let the Judiciary Committee (essentially a search committee in this case) do its job of identifying and sorting out the best people for the position.
Considerable time would be taken (esp. for a lifetime appointment, which is a very bad idea anyway) to gather information for top candidates. including independent and thorough background checks such as by the FBI.
There needs to be a clear job description stating the experience and qualities sought for the position, against which the committee can match the experience and character of each nominee. Do we have a job description on file for the skills and attributes of a Supreme Court Justice? Too bad we didn't have a published job description for the POTUS position in 2016. Without a clear description, the risk is the process gets politicized.
This brings up the problem of when a top executive has a candidate in mind he wants to push, such as Trump's preference for a judge who says the president is above the law Not in the job description, the committee can say, and a very bad idea.
K.'s teen record is disturbing & he is tainted esp, with regard to women. A character issue. Move to the next candidate, rather than make a big mistake.
1
@PB The major problem with our system of choosing a president--and therefore his appointees--is the outdated electoral college system. Efforts should be geared towards getting rid of it.
As I mentioned in my previous comments that Michael Avenatti is not yet done coming with the next accusations that he's ready to unleash.
He did exactly that on Rachel Maddow tonight.
So in a span of 48 hours we will be hearing from his client, a witness and a victim of sexual assault allegations of Kavanaugh.
NYTimes just broke another story about one page in a Kavanaugh yearbook, the headline reads:
Kavanaugh’s Yearbook Page Is ‘Horrible, Hurtful’ to a Woman It Named.
His interview on Fox was such farce, rehashing the same responds over and over again, just like the person who nominated him does.
He believes if he lies and repeats his lies people will believe him.
He wouldn't even allow his wife to respond to the question directed to her.
Just pathetic!
Lying is a main characteristic of this nominee, he lied about his mentor, Alex Kozinski, who has been driven off the bench after accusations of sexual harassment, he lied repeatedly about using materials stolen from Democratic senators to advance President Bush’s judicial nominees, The vacuum of honesty is just shocking.
But what else can we expect from trump's nominee, who said this: "Mr. President, thank you. Throughout this process, I’ve witnessed firsthand your appreciation for the vital role of the American judiciary. No president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination."
My case in point.
7
Nobody ever wielded a more clever, vicious, and truthful wrecking ball against Ted Cruz than Bret Stephens does in this dialogue. "I D-E-S-P-I-S-E Ted Cruz", the man says, and then he tells you why.
4
Mr. Stephens, do you not recall the request made by Dr. Blasey's lawyers from the start: please have the FBI investigate the claim?So it is disingenuous to say that you don't know who to believe. And given that the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee are the ones preventing an investigation, isn't it even more cavalier to pretend that you don't know what they are thinking? Connect the dots, please. And good idea, by the way: let the FBI investigate!
8
Wow, Bret Stephens nails the Cruz description.
I can only add that Cruz is representative of how awful the Republicans are in this state. The sitting AG has been charged with a felony and the Republicans are running him for reelection. Think about the nerve.
Speaking of nerve, Tom DeLay was supposed to go to prison for the money laundering whereby he funneled contributions to the Texas state legislature for gerrymandering the Congressional districts, but the Republican Judges on the appeals courts acquitted him. As part of that wildly successful effort to rig all the districts to favor Republicans, Governor Oops -- this is true -- illegally ordered the state troopers to arrest and seize the Democrats to force a quorum. The House first fled to Oklahoma and then the Senate fled to Arizona, but Governor Oops and DeLay got their way in the end.
The troopers literally -- this is true -- went to a Houston area NICU where newborn babies were struggling for their lives to try to seize one of the House democrats who was a father of new twins. In addition to being immoral, it was entirely illegal -- Governor Oops had no authority to order them to do that.
The only good thing about the Trump Presidency is that before 45, you couldn't make up anything worse than the Republicans in Texas.
18
Gail
After what has been too long, a column that brought tears to my eyes, Brett's description of Ted Cruz was so perfect I snorted my morning coffee!
Thanks, we need all the laughter we can manage to squeeze from today's news...
16
The Justice Department should never have been established as a branch of the executive to begin with and a corrupt president like Trump only makes this more apparent It should have been established as a separate agency under the auspices of our court system with oversight by Congress. Who would ever put the person in charge of investigating him or her self.
Ever since Trump became our misogynist in chief a sexual undertone has permeated our politics. Trump gained votes from women who excused him as boys will be boys and i suspect Kavanaugh as did Clarence Thomas will get a similar pass. The Kavanugh confirmation process has only once again emphasized the GOP ability to overlook ethical standards for political ends. Democrats need to push the issue once again in the hopes that our country will find its soul, heart and something resembling a respect for women, but we are probably about to gain another GOP misogynist judge who like the man who nominated him has little respect for women and just declares it all just old fake news.
7
Gail Collins and Bret Stephens, Would you please reexamine the Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill case; was it done correctly?
-- Bill Sutherland
1
A clinical psychologist friend sent me this today:
An esteemed colleague, a psychologist with forensic training, wrote these observations (permission was given to share, please do if you want).
“As I watched Kavanaugh's TV interview today and his bid to win on the court of public opinion, I found myself thinking about two things:
1) Apparently the man has or had a major alcohol problem. Even if one assumes that everything he is saying he truly believes is accurate, it appears there were multiple times when he was so intoxicated that accurate memories would be unlikely. No mention of this in his talk, and more importantly:
2) He keeps saying he wants the Senate confirmation to be "a fair process" but there is no fairness involved when several key committee members who will be voting are already on record on how they will vote before they hear from Christine Blasey Ford. Any judicial officer would recognize this for the confirmatory bias that it is; and any ethical officer of the court would refuse to participate in such a staggeringly unfair proceeding. So completely independent from whatever Ford is going to say, my take is that if we're not talking about Kavanaugh being deceitful, then we are talking about someone with an inadequate understanding of addiction which is unfortunate since addiction is such a common theme in lawsuits; and a man with a grossly impaired commitment to just legal process.”
17
@Nancie Yeah! And, lest we forget, Judge Kavanaugh has already lied. Actively lied about the purloined Democratic documents sent to his attention. This charade should have ended then.
3
Ted Curz has one redeeming quality: he makes an excellent bad example.
3
Supreme confusion is right. On top of this mess, Kavanaugh's appearance on Fox was in very poor taste for a Supreme Court nominee, making this a truly three-ring circus. Where are we headed now? Good question. Every day in this administration is a ground-hog's day in Hades.
9
Me thinks Bret takes the tar out of Ted too much (in his present serpentine screed). Bret makes us think his Ted tarring is just a cover for his, Grassley, McConnell, Trump, Porter, Stephen Miller (i'll stop there, for now) still un-vocalizable GOP/G?P embarrassment.
4
A frightening week ahead for all of us, with the cliff-hanging hearings re SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh's alleged sexual harassment of women and the possible firing by Trump of the Special Counsel's boss, Dep. A.G. Rod Rosenstein. Colossal ball of worms, nasty rat's nest, created by the G.O.P. in honour of their malign and demented leader, our president. Trump is ensconsed on the horns of a dilemma the likes of which he has never seen.
Brett Kavanaugh won't withdraw from his coveted nomination to the Court, His confirmation hearing is now doomed by accounts of his transgressive sexual behaviour toward high-school and college women. If the G.O.P. Senate men's club crowns Judge Kavanaugh, his name will be as muddy as Clarence Thomas's was after Anita Hill's testimony in 1991. Equality for women is the real cultural transformation of our time.
1
brett's comment re ted cruz is worth the annual subscription to the nyt! a fun reminder that we can be partisan AND honor common sense and morality.
5
Neil Gorsuch's smooth confirmation is the most obvious evidence that this is not a political hatchet job.
5
The fact that Bret can't/won't give an immediate, clear, direct answer to Gail's final question tells you everything that you need to know. About Bret, about Republicans.
10
Wasn't going to read this as it seemed too predictable, but glad as I did as, besides being sharp and funny, it's a useful look at how politically different people can, from time to time, and maybe more these days, almost finish each others' sentences.
Still, Gail: win or lose on Kavanaugh, this is your inning--and deservingly so. Women are expressing themselves and mostly right about what they have to say. But how about some foresight and maintenance of journalistic ethics?
The continued practice by you (as well as many other NYT columnists) of the over-generalization of men is shown by your "Men don't get it." In what would not be tolerated about just about any other demographic, a phrase: Demographic group (fill in other then men) followed by anything negative (fill in) would not be tolerated and probably get flagged by Standards.
But it's always acceptable if about "men."
It's a little better when later you use "Powerful men," as your adjective recognizes not all men are powerful and not covered in the sentence. Still not fair to, and doesn't recognize the individuality of, powerful men who don't fit the charge.
So while a violation of another journalistic policy, conciseness, more modifiers improves accuracy and reduces the resentment of those you are (perhaps unintentionally) insulting. In a later inning you reduce the chances of an unnecessary backlash from otherwise mostly allies.
It would be nice to get a response from the NYT as I've said this many times.
2
This is one of the best features in the NYT. I look forward to it always.
6
An excellent dialogue, though I do think I should point out that Trump generally handles glaring contradictions, moral choices, impasses, problems and the like by not seeing them in the first place, or ignoring them when they’re shoved in his face, or screaming incoherently, or scapegoating like crazy, or moving on rapidly to the next fiasco.
This is the original Gordian knot guy. Unfortunately a lot of these knots are tied directly into the national aorta.
6
“Gail: The Kavanaugh story is about sex, but it’s also about class. The country now sees Brett Kavanaugh as a rich, drunken thug who left some young women with very traumatic memories.”
It’s not a story about Kavanaugh or a class at all but about the failing journalism, the corrupt Hollywood and distorted social morality.
Those factors promoted the idea that is socially acceptable and preferable to pursue the happiness through excessive drinking and wild partying.
The drunk driving deaths and equally reckless sexual misconduct is then blamed onto the adolescent teenagers, not on the system that brainwashed the youth into the reckless and dangerous lifestyle…
1
So your argument is that as an adolescent, Kavanaugh was brainwashed by liberal journalists and movie producers into believeing that heavy drinking and sexual attacks are the preferred social avenues to travel in the pursuit of happiness.
Do I have your position correct?
3
@FWS
No sir, I did not use adjective "liberal" meaning I blamed the mass culture for heavily promoting the heavy drinking as a social norm. Those media outlets turned the women into sexual objects (just pay attention to the contemporary fashion norms compared to five decades ago) Combination of drunkardness and commercial exploatition of human sexuality created the fertile ground that resulted in the dramatic increase in the number of sexual attacks...
I hope that Gail is right that this marks a cultural transformation. When I was a teen in the '60s, I had already been indoctrinated in the idea that a girl had to be careful about what she wore and how she behaved to avoid sending off the "wrong kind" of signals to men. I had read magazine stories about rape trials in which the woman was scrutinized for somehow "inciting" her attacker. Of course most women didn't report assaults in those days.
We seem to have moved on from the idea that an assault is the woman's own fault, but now the question seems to be, "Can we believe her?" How can anyone prove something that left only psychological scars? The Republicans seem too bent on pushing their candidate through to even listen to the women who are starting to speak up. The question that remains is, "Will we believe them?" I know I do.
9
"But neither do I want to accept (a world) in which mere accusation without substantial corroboration can destroy a person’s career and reputation."
Bret, you've been watching too much CSI. In the real world all disputes involve evaluating the credibility of a witness. Judge Kavanaugh says he never knowingly used tainted information, even though the subject line of the email in question was "Spying." Clearly a question of credibility. Physical evidence does not speak, it relies upon context. Proof is based upon motive, opportunity, patterns of behavior and corroborating evidence.
Here we have a woman who was very reluctant to come forward. She has lived a quiet apolitical life. When the press is literally on her doorstep she decides she has no choice. She passes a lie detector test, she has no compelling motive to open herself to the torrent of hatred and abuse she has suffered. The only motive that satisfactorily explains her choice is this: she is speaking the truth.
Kavanaugh's testimony has been a parade of obfuscation and explanations that strain credulity. The Republicans pushing his nomination have refused to let the FBI investigate and refuse to call the only other witness to testify. In that context, her statement an unsubstantiated allegation only because she has been denied the opportunity to substantiate it.
47
As previously said, this is a job interview, and there are plenty of other good choices without the baggage...even if it is 30 years old. As an 80 year old woman, I still wish for evidence of the manners of a gentleman. I am still wishing for respect and equality for women. I remember well when a young woman only had her reputation as an asset, and she was wise to keep her brains a secret if she wanted to find a husband.
21
You do realize that you can't give Kavanaugh the presumption of innocence without presuming that his accuser is lying. Why presume his innocence and not hers? A truly neutral stance would make no presumptions and place big question marks over both of them. But we all have our biases and desires. Admit that you want him to be innocent, which simultaneously means you want her to be guilty. I freely admit I want the reverse. To keep him off the Supreme Court, for his poltics as well as his slimey persona and lack of ethics. But I also tend to believe her because of my own experiences and those of almost every woman I know.
15
Dear Bret Stephens:
Not being confirmed to the Supreme Court DOES NOT constitute having your career “ruined”. He will remain a federal judge if not confirmed. There should be a far higher burden of proof on the accused (as it is in civil cases) when the only stakes for that person is whether or not they are confirmed to a lifetime appointment on the most powerful bench in the country.
218
@Mark T I "above reproach" too much to ask?
@Mark T-Agreed and if more evidence is forthcoming, will Brett Kavanaugh be above the law he professes to love and support?
Deep down, this is about the Republicans trying to push through Kavanaugh and preventing the Democrats from killing his nomination.
If Kavanaugh does get onto the Supreme Court, perhaps he can become Clarance Thomas’ wingman.
9
Picking a SCOTUS nominee should be like picking jurists in our court rooms. Both sides pick, choose, dismiss as they see fit. We are left with 12+ jurists we hope are thoughtful and will be impartial and intelligent. (yeah, yeah...I know...fantasy ok?!)
But whittle these 12+ down to one.
Boom. SCOTUS pick.
Kavanaugh doesn't pass muster. Drop him and move on.
We are looking at a life time appointment.
Someone who will sit in judgement over all America. Not just one partisan side/agenda over another. ALL AMERICA~!
If the whiff of impropriety is scented. Move on.
The pool is huge.
Toss this rotting fish back.
Cast out again.
15
In re to: "The real issue is whether a respected judge can be held accountable for a drunken sexual assault he made as a teenager."
That's an important issue, but equally if not more important is the question of whether Kavanaugh is lying in 2018.
33
Question: What did Christine Blasey Ford, and now Deborah Ramirez, have to gain personally by stepping forward into the buzz saw of the pro-Kavanaugh Republicans running the Judiciary Committee?
Answer: Nothing, but satisfying their sense of patriotism and their perceived duty to stand up for other women sexually assaulted and bullied into silence.
Question: What does Brett Kavanaugh have to gain personally by completely stone-walling Ford, Ramirez and any other woman who makes an accusation?
Answer: Everything he has always dreamed of and for the rest of his life.
This definitely is not just a she-said/he-said situation.
The vicious attacks on these women by Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell make it all the clearer to decent Americans that our vote is to keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court.
34
Kavanaugh has been practicing and rehearsing for days, ever since the first allegation came out. If he was honest he would have requested an independent body to investigate the matter. Instead he goes on TV to try to convince the world of what a perfect citizen he is, while his friend Mark Judge hides out somewhere, away from the attorneys and the press.
I think the truth lies closer to what Mark Judge wrote in "Wasted". He also confided a secret to his girlfriend: that he and his friends gang-raped a drunk girl while in high school.
Judge's book 'Wasted' should be entered into the record. Judge's confession to his girlfriend should be entered into the record. Dr. Ford's polygraph test should be entered into the record.
29
WH has situated Kavanaugh on the plank, and Trump pushes him further out with each passing day. Trump relishes his power as game show host nd Kavanugh , even without a blindfold which would only dilute the suspense, is so enraptured by the prize that he willfully participates in his own downfall.
Kavanaugh thought he was protected by the halo of the judiciary and able to steer clear of the Trump vortex of public humiliation , tattered relationships tainted careers and political terrorism.
There are no antidotes for hubris other than discipline and self-awareness which Kavanugh lacks on many levels in many ways over many years.
You can never outrun your past : it has too much of a head start.
7
Bret Stephens description of Ted Cruz is classic. And as someone who has lived in Texas since forever, it is totally accurate.
Who are those people who voted for him, the ones I stand next to in line at the grocery store? That I sit next to in church or at a sporting event? What on earth is going through their minds?
I suspect that what's going on in their minds is the same strange, primordial soup that got them to vote for Trump in the first place, namely absolutely nothing.
51
Kavanaugh appearing on the government propaganda channel to try to sway the jury is enough in itself to disqualify him.
33
Rosenstein keeps his job; Kavanaugh to the Court. No "blue wave" in November. Trump 2020 if the economy stays strong.
4
Kavanaugh could have gone up before the Judiciary Committee when the accusations against him first surfaced and leveled with the American people by saying something honest like:
“I drank way too much in high school.
I got drunk a lot.
I treated a lot of girls badly.
Yes, I roughed up Dr. Ford.
And later when I had daughters of my own I was sorry for how
I acted.
But it was too late then for me to do anything about it.
The truth is I am now a very different man who believes he could be a very good Supreme Court Justice."
The American people are usually pretty good about recognizing honesty in politicians and a truthful statement from him about how he behaved many years ago might have saved his nomination.
But it wasn’t in him, and he has still not apologized to Dr. Ford.
So it’s time now for him to step down.
66
Bret,
It appears that you have never truly understood, that women in society has always been chattel passed from father to husband. Women from birth or molded to be subservient, the male is always first and foremost. Women have also been carefully taught that if there's any indiscretion, this is always her fault. She was in the wrong place at the wrong time, dressed and acting inappropriately. If she dared to speak out, certainly no one would believe her. Indeed, women deserve the scarlet letter, but "boys will be boys".
Now we stand, unwittingly at the comprehension that women are second class citizens, how can we right this incredible wrong? This next SC nominee, will eliminate the right of women to choice, guaranteeing our repression. Can we even offer women a fig leaf of trust that their regressed memories at the hands of man are real?
Certainly, with the old all boys club of the Republican Congress and a chauvinist pig for a leader, things really look bad.
This rush to confirm Kavanaugh is only a further push to consolidate political power on the Supreme Court, no delays like the Obama's nominee suffered. This Judge did not even receive a hearing and the seat was kept open for over 400 days.
9
Having some knowledge of the class of people Brett K went to school with, there is something that you hinted at but did not say. This class of people bond together against the working class or anyone not of the rich and thus elite. You do not tell tales from home that the lower classes will hear. Those women with their pink Brett buttons are typical of this class of women going back generations. You out one of them, you out them all. It reminds me of Victorian times, when the upper class did scandalous things but
God help you if your speaking up let the lower classes know the upper class were just people like them, probably worse.
27
@hw - Your comment is totally fabricated or you may be confused and talking about the New England WASP prep school crowd. This is a Catholic School. Most of the attendees are one or two generations deep in America. Their parents, grandparents more than likely were working class, their extended families are certainly working class.
1
@mkm Or maybe they were in Maryland, the first Catholic-tolerant colony, starting about 400 years ago.
SHS on GMA--Let's be clear-Brett Kavanaugh has been strong and unequivocal in his denial that anything happened-Right, that makes him innocent- how many in prison had been strong and unequivocal that they didn't do anything wrong--Weak, really weak. on Stephanoupolos asking why no FBI investigation SHS said-"We have a process in place-Brett Kavanaugh has been begging to tell his story" except to the FBI. Porter, Ailes, Moore, O'Reilly, now Kavanaugh--Trump has always taken the man's side--every single time. His mind is set--Ram Kavanaugh Through.......
7
This closing of this "discussion" is meant to be funny but it isn't.
It isn't funny that Bret, along with so many other Republicans ,will choose party over values, over common sense.
Yes, he should choose Beto. Period.
27
I agree with Bret that Mark Judge, alleged witness and alleged accomplice and vivid chronicler of life at Georgetown Prep, should be called as witness.
32
If someone were to appear at the private school Kavanaugh sends his girls to with such a stain over them applying for a coaching position, they would be escorted off the property by security and told never to return.
The act of granting that person an interview could well cost the headmaster his job.
Shouldn't the Supreme Court be as selective? Does the Republican senate not see how bad it looks?
If there is doubt, erase it.
14
Aren’t alcohol acquired capacity issues the bigger picture? Did the Judge tax himself mentally as many do in the legal profession but too much to be a top public official for life?
3
I was caught stealing STP motor oil as a teen. But my father, a policeman, never stopped YELLING at me about it for a year following that shocking day. It was my wake up call to adulthood.
What were Kavanaughs parents telling him about portence with femmes and drinking as a minor?
14
"Yet firing him on charges of insubordination means believing that the Fake News got the story about Rosenstein’s 25th Amendment musings right. This may be the ultimate Trumpian dilemma."
yes! thank you bret. i was wondering if or when someone would point this out..... however his base will just use the old blind pig analogy and accept rosenstein's disloyalty as fact.
10
This isn’t about due process. The Kavanaugh confirmation isn’t a trial. We’re picking a person to a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. One would hope that this person, who’s going to be the last line on defense for our constitution, would have impeccable ethics and morals. I think what men, especially privileged white men including one of the authors of this article, don’t understand is exactly what it would take for a woman to bring up an accusation like this. The humiliation, the attacks. Nobody in her position is going to do this unless she absolutely has to. I would rather make a mistake and not confirm someone as questionable as Kavanaugh. After all, there are other people who are qualified to be Supreme Court justices who have never tried to rape anyone, right?
267
@Ann P "...there are other people who are qualified to be Supreme Court justices who have never tried to rape anyone, right?" Yes, there are, but I don't think this president would nominate any of them.
@Ann P "After all, there are other people who are qualified to be Supreme Court justices who have never tried to rape anyone, right?" If you are a Senate Democrat, there probably aren't, not if they were nominated by Trump. And if they were women, well I imagine they could be remembered doing something horrible too. Remember the accusers can be ludicrously drunk at the time of the incident, and need no witnesses.
I believe that Blasey Ford and Ramirez might not "acknowledge that none of us really knows." I'm quite confident that many people really do know but are fearful of coming forward given the evident brutal treatment from a "more enlightened" world they could expect. That's where changes need to be made - these women (and many others, no doubt) didn't speak up about Kavanaugh because those times (30 some years ago) were even less enlightened.
Everyone needs to feel free to tell the truth about abuse, harassment, and criminality - no matter how powerful and "respected" the perpetrators or how defenseless the victims. Gail's right, we are seeing a tectonic shift in attitudes and Bret you'd better get on the right side of this one.
12
This conversation nails the issue.
Should Kavanaugh’s impropriety be proven under some legal standard (e.g. preponderance) or is the mere allegation sufficient to keep him off the Supreme Court?
There is so far only one credible allegation (Ramirez apparently admitted she is not sure it was Kavanaugh who exposed himself). And it happened 36 years ago. On the other hand we are discussing one of the most important and responsible positions in the country.
Shouldn’t one serious allegation, even if unproven, be sufficient to derail him?
Should one serious allegation, if unproven, be sufficient to derail him?
4
@Steven Roth: It's not just "one serious allegation." There are enough other credible charges against Kavanaugh--- e.g., receiving stolen Senate Democrat emails in 2002 and then lying about it to the Senate--- to cast a shadow over his character.
The bottom line is what Gail Collins writes:
"Nobody deserves a lifetime Supreme Court nomination. This isn’t like the right to buy a home or to be employed. It’s an exceptional honor."
Why should America settle for a tainted candidate like Kavanaugh?
9
If the stars align and Ted Cruz is defeated you can bet that he will attempt to get even closer to Trump, hoping for an appointment to the federal bench. One can only imagine what horrors would be revealed during his confirmation hearing if it ever came to that. Even his former Republican Senate colleagues would probably gag if they had to listen to his opening statement and days of testimony.
9
But Brett, Brett...how can you possibly speak so harshly about Ted Cruz, the favored candidate of the religious right (at least before their ultimate prostration before the Devil's builder himself, Trump)?
How can you possibly challenge the wisdom of the holier-than-thou community?
13
What really matters in this period of 2018 is for the Democrats to come up with and publicize credible, inviting campaign promises that could attract and win borderline voters in the key districts of the Midwest to the Democratic side. Until that happens most of our state legislatures and both houses of Congress will remain in GOP hands. That means no change!
This media circus focused on drunken parties of adolescents, decades ago, is a waste of media time and space.
It distracts attention that needs to be focused elsewhere. It does not address the LOCAL bread and butter issues that can or could swing votes to the Democratic side in The Heartland. It is soap opera. The GOP will appoint Kavanaugh as long they control the Senate. With that legislative body control they can do whatever they please, whenever they please. It may not please the rest of us, but they have no need to care.
10
On the question of standard of proof, we should remember that this is not a trial, it is a job interview. Innocent until proven guilty is a standard for legal determination. Probable cause might be a better way to look at it. There are a lot of legal fish in the sea, and if probable cause exists to suspect misbehavior one shouldn't press a nomination when there are so many untainted candidates to choose from. Would you hire for life a job applicant who came with so much baggage?
50
@Paul If you want to distill the situation down that far then Senate Republicans, having the votes needed to confirm a Supreme Court nominee, are the hiring managers and have the say to confirm (hire) who they wish. If you want to take this to the practical extreme then there you have it. I am not saying that Kavanaugh should be confirmed but saying that due process doesn’t apply because this is essentially a job interview opens up the discussion in both directions. Without standards we are left with what we have now. That is a bad case of mob mentality.
3
An allegation of any witness of what she observed, stated under oath, is by definition not “baseless”. That testimony is real evidence, even if contradicted or uncorroborated. People get convicted of crimes every day of the week on the eyewitness testimony of a single person. It’s certainly a basis to deny a lifetime job ruling over us all.
88
@Yeah
I don't see a 36 year old recollection as evidence, simply an allegation. An investigation may produce something that could actually be evidence. As Gail said, absent someone else claiming to have 'done the deed', no dem will believe BK. All on the committee said they'd vote no before any allegations anyway.
1
@Yeah
Most employment is "employment at will." Employers can hire and fire for a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all.
The employer can deny you a job even if the allegation is false. The employer doesn't even have to think it's true. He can deny a job because he thinks there's a small chance the allegation might be true. He can deny a job because he doesn't want to have to decide.
The American people are in effect hiring Kavenaugh.
(There are some exceptions to employment at will, such as race, religion, gender, and union contracts, all of which Republicans oppose.)
1
Trying to be fair to Frat Boy Kav is the conservative version of punting on third down. FBK has led a life of privilege and that is exactly why he does not belong on the Supreme Court.
The last thing that 330,000,000 Americans need is to have a 1%'er making decisions that will effect the quality of our lives.
The Supreme Court should be populated not by the elite, but by human beings who have lived lives of achievement, not lives pre-scripted by their station in life.
103
@bobbybow
Good point. On the level where it really matters, where is the legal concept of a jury of our peers? This isn’t a criminal trial; the 1% want a permanent vote against justice for all, in all matters.
4
People are entitled by the constitution to the legal presumption of innocence in a court of law when accused of a crime. Not here, in the arena of public opinion.
15
@carol
That's not relevant to what's going on. This is about a nomination to the Supreme Court, not a trial in a criminal case.
7
@carol,
Imagine how mad you'd be if we were shouting "Lock Him Up" even though he was never even charged with a crime?
Golly!!!
1
One thing that is undisputed is that Kavanaugh repeatedly broke the law with underage drinking.
This is ignored because so many people got drunk when they too were underage.
However, what if he had broken the law when he was 17 years old 35 years ago, not by getting fall down drunk, but by crossing the border for a chance to work hard and build a better life for himself and his family? Instead of installing him on the Supreme Court, the Republicans would arrest him, separate him from his family, bill us taxpayers to increase the profits of the private prison company Republican donors to hold him in detention, and then kick him out of the country leaving behind a heartbroken and devastated American family.
Here is a recent report of what happened to a man who came here at just a little older than the drunken partiers, worked hard, paid taxes, is loved by his American family.....
https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/New-Fairfield-Father-Gives-Up-...
There are many other tragedies just like this one.
If we are going to be firm against even a single law broken, well, Kavanaugh repeatedly broke the law for no good reason other than drunken partying, so why do Republicans insist that he be installed on the Supreme Court?
149
@Lynnhe the difference being that anyone who hopped the border at that age and remained for 35 years would still be an active offender and a criminal alien.
1
Again and again there is the presumption of guilt
by so many commentators and Columnists when
nothing has been proved.
Not one single person who is not directly involved
in the incidents has come forward with evidence
that Kavanaugh was involved some 36 years ago.
Ms. Ford accusation is not backed up with a
time, a date, place and an explanation for why she was
at the gathering and how she got home after she
fled the gathering.
Ms. Ramirez's accusation is 34 years old,
she admits she was drunk and she admits she could
be mistaken. No one has supported her accusation.
Perhaps this is just an attempt to stall the nomination,
to force Kavanaugh to step away, to convince two
Republican senators to not vote for Kavanaugh .
Perhaps both women are telling the truth.
But to deny a person the right to be considered innocent
until proven guilty, and ironically over a Supreme Court
nomination, bespeaks how far this country has fallen.
Carry out the F.B.I. investigation, cross examine any
and all who may be involved, but give Mr. Kavanaugh
all the legal rights he is due and do not judge the man
before you do.
It is duplicitous to say that Kavanaugh cannot be on
the Supreme Court due to these unproved allegations
but can remain on the Appeal's Court, if he is not
good enough for the Supreme Court due to his past,
he is not good enough for the Appeal's Court.
23
@John Brown
For once I (partially) agree with a Trumpian. Yes, carry out a thorough investigation by the FBI.
That should not be a right vs. left issue.
Integrity of the SCOTUS is more important that one nominee's "rights," whatever those are imagined to be.
18
Job interview, not a trial. Do try to keep up; the point’s been made repeatedly. It’s not a matter of due process because no one is going to jail.
At worst, the senate will deny Kavanaugh a seat in the Supreme Court. No great tragedy. He still gets to write opinions denying abortion to immigrant minors in federal custody. That’s something, right?
5
@John Brown Since he perjured himself to get on the appeals court, you are correct, he doesn't belong there.
6
If the goal of the right-to-life movement is to overturn Roe v.Wade, or enable further restrictions, then consider the following questions:
* why is Kavanaugh uniquely deserving of your support? Why do you think another, for instance Amy Barrett, would not serve you better?
* You aware (I hope) that the most recent Gallop poll shows that 64% of Americans do not want to see Roe v Wade overturned?
What do you think the consequences will be, in terms of public respect for this ruling, if it is made by a court with two publicly-accused sexual offenders against women?
* Are you concerned at all that religious support for Donald Trump is eroding respect for you as Christians, and that the savage treatment of Blasey and entirely uncritical support for Kavanaugh, together with continued support for Trump appears tantamount to endorsing a male prerogative for sexual assault, at least for privileged whites?
* No accusations of sexual improprieties were made against Alito or Gorsuch; the Gorsuch nomination was particularly offensive to Democrats, for reasons you should understand. Why do you presume that Blasey's allegations are a fraud?
*If the Kavanaugh nomination is withdrawn, or fails, why do you presume that there will not be a pro-life nominee who is confirmed? There is plenty of time yet before Nov 6, and the current Senate remains until January.
If you are pro-life, get another nominee. Continued support for Kavanaugh betrays some other agenda.
65
This comment appeared 8 hours ago, clearly people have seen it, but there is not a single reply from any supporter of Kavanaugh ... crickets.
1
Are we really supposed to believe that Rod Rosenstein seriously considered wearing a wire when meeting with The President of The United States ? The only reason some are finding this fathomable is because of the outrageous times we live in. I'm sure most career Justice Dept. officials find this an absurd allegation. I've seen some of the retired ones speak out. This would be an enormous breach of protocol that a careful, thoughtful man like Rosenstein would never take.
14
The fact that Stephens can't say that he would vote for Beto over Ted suggests his morals are situational too. He spends an entire paragraph sliming Ted (deservedly so) but he might still vote for him?
34
Pausing for short novenas to the Blessed Mother seems to be very effective, Gail. Never in my life have I seen so much anger and action from a woman who has been notably docile and compliant for hundreds of years.
In beleaguered moment my mother would cry out, "Mother of God!" Considering the ways Republicans and evangelicals have corrupted her son, the Mother of God might well be considering reform school for the entire bunch, her son included.
9
As long as you're talking about 'Reality Shows', which you were, you forgot to mention the new Survivor coming on this week.
Hilarious yet accurate description of Ted Cruz . Thank you, Bret Stephens!
65
"But deep down, this isn’t really about whether ...Ford is telling the truth." Of course it isn't. Collins is cynically confirming what her own paper is reporting & what we all knew. This is payback for Garland. If Kavanaugh is completely vindicated, Democrats will oppose him...right? The coming testimony is lurid political theater. In today's paper the NYT quotes Brian Fallon, a HRC campaign adviser that the 1st step to stalling Trump's judicial picks is blocking Kavanaugh. The same article also quotes Josh Holmes, a McConnell former chief of staff that "The only way to accomplish that is to burn the clock on this nomination by any means necessary in hopes that they win the majority in the Senate and deny President Trump an appointment for the next two years.” Well the Dems were always going to give him a fair hearing before they metaphorically hung him. We knew that. Anyway Avenatti is putting something together. Thankfully, he’s a balanced, nonpartisan guy with no personal agenda.These allegations should have have been investigated months ago. Not leaked for maximum political effect a few days before the confirmation vote. I believe we will regret how we let this spiral out of control. One day the shoe is going to be on the other foot. Count on it. It will be a Democrat nominee for SCOTUS or maybe even President. A 40 year old sexual allegation will resurface at the 11 hour that will be hard to prove either way. Then what? How are we going to react? What a nightmare.
3
@Bill Brown
Here's the deal that I'm prepared to offer.
Trump gets Kavannaugh - but the price is a Gorsuch resignation and the appointment of Merrick Garland, thus settling all unfinished business between the political parties as regards the Court.
The longer the Republicans delay in accepting the reality that the base of the Democratic Party will not rest until this wrong is righted, even if it involves outside-the-box measures at some later date, the higher the price of the eventual reparations will become.
A President aided and abetted by Russian hackers and voter suppression does not get the right to name multiple Supreme Court justices, while a President who won the popular vote and electoral college in two consecutive elections gets stiffed.
When the Republicans stiffed Obama, they stiffed us - and we will not rest until this theft is avenged.
There can be no peace between these electorates until this issue satisfactorily resolved.
16
@Bill Brown, read the part in the article where Gail articulates a response men might think about, just for a teeny minute before reminding us all that women's speaking about sexual attacks is a 'nightmare'. Look at Judge Kav's daughters! Get ready to defend their attackers (teenage or otherwise) cuz evidently you will, unless it's a democrat. What you see as a situation spiraling out of control is actually a civil rights rebellion among half of the U.S. population, totally fed up with policies that allow men to injure them with no consequences ever, generation after generation.
Please note that President Obama had zero scandals, zero accusations from women who say he attacked them. THAT is what life looks like for men who don't hurt women. Don't treat women like they are your personal property, and you won't be subjected to accusations! How hard is this?
I'm not worried about a future where men fear the consequences of beating, raping and withholding justice for women. Why are you?
9
The opportunity for payback for Garland first arose with Gorsuch. If slime could be manufactured from thin air, it would have happened then.
The question is: are you so determined to “win” that you’re willing to settle for a second Clarence Thomas? Do you want Roe overturned by any means possible, even if it reeks of misogyny and privilege?
If so, the ancient warning awaits: Be careful what you wish for.
7
It’s like Gail and Bret recorded my conversation with my husband last night on the Kavanaugh case, stripped it of emotion and made it pithy.
I think this difference of perspective from smart, sane people on these charges is making this a huge cultural moment. This isn’t knee jerk Fox Fanatics vs. Patent Progressives, but a real wrestling with reputation, misogyny and what we can live with.
(Also, why is the cultural toleration of disgusting drunkenness that so often leads to violence and vulnerability getting a huge pass in this cultural moment?)
35
mr stephens, EVERYbody seems to despise ted cruz. how did he get elected?
26
@barbara
Because so many Texans truly distrust the Democratic party, and Cruz was smarmy enough to get the Republican nomination, which does not require support from a broad sampling of the public.
The Democrats really need to figure this out. There is no reason they can't win 60% majorities in the House, Senate and popular presidential vote. They just need to win 10% more of the population, and they don't seem to really want to do what it would take to win that. Wisconsin. North Carolina. Arizona. Even Utah, for goodness sake.
The current iteration of Republicans on the other hand know their natural constituency represents only about 20% of the population, so they do anything they need to do to win the remaining 30% (give or take the necessary smidgen) in every single election they fight.
7
Wow, Kavanagh, Rosenstien, Cruz and Trump. You should have titled this piece Three Men and a Baby. I believe Kavanaugh is acting appallingly, I believe Rosenstien acted sensibly, I don't believe Cruz's act at all and I never believe Trump. Next case on the docket please.
36
Those football players protesting the social injustice during the national anthem that symbolizes and stands for our country unity are certainly doing it at the wrong moment.
It would be far more memorable to protest the racism or police brutality by taking a knee after a ball was snapped and received by a quarterback, grabbed by a running back or thrown toward the wide receivers.
By refusing to personally act violently toward another human being would really emphasize the unnecessary social brutality.
What is the key difference between being brutally slammed to the ground by a police officer or another football player?
Why would it be a crime in the first instance and an entertainment in the second case?
Expecting our journalists to be instrumental is solving the social problems would be quite a stretch. Haven’t exactly the journalists and the reporters get us hooked onto the dangerous, violent and stupid behavior?
@Kenan Porobic "What is the key difference between being brutally slammed to the ground by a police officer or another football player?" The answer is "In" like Involuntary as opposed to voluntary.
7
@Des Johnson
Sir,
The only problem with your suggestion is that it brainwashed the dozens millions children at their most vulnerable young age into believing that intentional hitting other human beings is fun and entertaining.
I guess you are not concerned at all with the brain damages resulting from the prolonged and vicious exposure to the head and body blows experienced during the many years of playing the football during the high school, college or professionally.
Maybe the pain resulting from the brain damages is less severe and harsh because of prefix “in” you mentioned in your post…
@Kenan Porobic: I am fully aware of the dangers of football, especially at the level of the NFL. You posed a question. Maybe you'll pose it differently another time. I'm not only aware of the physical danger of American football: I'm very concerned that it consists of gladiatorial contests organized for the profit of wealthy owners; that the Pentagon uses the "games" as propaganda for militarism; and that the public in general allows the NFL to define what patriotism is. I am also concerned at the way television revenues rot college education, but that a different issue,
I am exhausted, please can there be a break from all this chaos?
9
I take strong exception to Mr. Stephens' hyperbolic praise of Ted Cruz. He did not once use the most appropriate word: Smarmy.
Dan Kravitz
41
@Dan Kravitz
Or you can use my new favorite descriptor for Ted and his ilk - oleaginous.
I love the way it just rolls off your tongue and connotes such great visual images of that sort of person.
4
@Betty's daughter, thanks I'll be using that word so much it will be out of style by election day, along with the oleaginous ones.
1
Bret's Ted Cruz description is perfect. Every time his name comes up, I think of Buddy Hackett's comment about Howard Cosell, "Some people hate him with a passion. Other people just hate him regular."
29
"The frontal lobe is the same part of the brain that is responsible for executive functions such as planning for the future, judgment, decision-making skills, attention span, and inhibition. "
There is a strong possibility that Kavanaugh's frontal lobe was not mature at 17 or 18. That is normal for a teenage boy. It is not accepted as being normal for a Supreme Court Justice to be a bold faced liar.
Law without justice is nothing more than a threat of force. We don't want our judges to be graduates of the, Kim Jong Un School of Law. Of course we don't want wrongful accusations made against members of our legal systems: Police to DA's to Judges.
The accusation against nominee K. needs to be fully investigated! If true this man's greater crime is lying to the American public.
14
Always remember, if neil gorsuch* and bret kavanaugh were decent human beings, charles and david koch would have nominated somebody else for the Supreme Court.
40
@Victorious Yankee, That's not a comment, it's a haiku. A damned true haiku too. Great comment.
2
This column, a conversation between Gail and Brett, is my FAVORITE part of the Times. Closely, followed by, "I was misinformed."
3
Both the Kavanaugh and Rosenstein situations underscore the chaos, tumult and anarchy that has come to describe the Donald Trump administration.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh, in spite of all the accumulated baggage of ten days, is still likely to be confirmed onto the Supreme Court. This would be possible had the president been any Democrat that you'd care to name. The Republicans on the Senate's Judiciary Committee are tone-deaf, willing to hazard the permanent besmirching of not only their committee and chamber but also of the Court for which they profess to have so much reverence. The hypocrisy is so blatant and they are uncaring as to how American women--nay--women the world over will view their masculine rape of the Court.
As for the deputy attorney general, I think he will meet his end as a career Justice Department official by week's end. The president cannot possibly keep him aboard and the reasons are boundless, as they are for keeping him on. I'm betting that Rosenstein goes under the guillotine. But what happens to Robert Mueller's investigation? What of the piles of documents, tapes and mountains of evidence that his office has accumulated? Will he hand these over to the executive branch or will he have copies available for posterity?
The mid-terms promise no respite from these fraught dramas for this president--or "We, the people." I thought we deserved better than this but when 90-millions tune out the process, Donald Trump is what we get.
And he's what we have.
15
Just saw replay of Fox interview with Kavanaugh. He sounded exactly like Bill Clinton when caught with his pants down. Kavanaugh said at least a dozen times that he hadn't "sexually assaulted" any woman -- ever. This isn't convincing because Kavanaugh is a lawyer who has been a prosecutor and judge. He knows that "sexual assault" has a legal meaning that could excuse conduct he thought was consensual or at least not hostile. He admits to drinking and going to parties. His statements are just one step behind Trump's "locker room" and "horsing around." And yes, he could have thought (or thinks now) what he was doing wasn't legally "assault." While the girl he was doing it with think it was. So what now? This sets a disgusting precedent for future judicial appointments.
46
In the United States of American it is a crime to drive while drunk. We hold everyone responsible for their actions regardless of their inebriated state. The law is the law and they knew the law before they got drunk.
In these same United States of American it seems that it is not a crime to rape or gang rape while drunk.
Judges in several recent high profile cases dismissed sentences for men who raped a women while he and or she was drunk.
The other rule in the rape playbook is that when a girl is drunk the rape apologists maintain that she can’t confirm if she gave consent or not.
So if a man was drunk too or in this case Kavanaugh was drunk how can he confirm that either?
The entire system is rigged to never believe the victim. And that system is called the patriarchy.
We are in danger of becoming another India or Afghanistan if the GOP confirm yet another man to our Supreme Court with pornographic fantasies and rape allegations in his past.
It will stain this country on an international stage... but perhaps we just need to accept that in every society their are politicians who believe that sexual violence and the threat of rape is the only way to organize and maintain a male dominated society.
And the symbolism of a man who attempted gang rape on a young child sitting on the highest court in the land is the creator of and guardian at the gate of that male dominated society and the message will be clear to future generations of who is in charge of who.
9
@Issy Too late! The electoral college appointment of trump as president has already stained us for a long time. It is hard to imagine any country taking us seriously, when we try to push our way of "democratic" government on them.
We have the type of government we once warned them about and often helped them overthrow.
2
The core issue here is due process. Hard right Republicans (by now few others seem to be opinion leaders in their party) complain about dirty tactics being used to derail their candidate. Maybe, but they are within the law. As was Mitch McConnell revolting manipulation of power to block Obama's candidate.
The loser is the US, whose stature as a great power with a morally valid system of government decreases every day. For people in lesser countries moral power made the difference in their perception between US or China/Russia.
15
Bret, I like you, as far as recovering Republicans go, but I think you and your former brethren are missing the forest for the trees. There is, actually, ample evidence of a youth of drunken debauchery of a sort that is (I dare hope) far outside the norm. Not the drinking, per se, but what seems to have come with it. One need only read Brett's yearbook page to see evidence of this -- the Bowling Alley Assault -- What a Night; the repeated references to a woman named Renate; the FFFFFFFourth of July, which Michael Avenatti says has been translated for him by those who know. And whatever you might say about Avenatti, he's never been one to overpromise and under deliver. Usually, it's the other way around. And there's the not so small matter of, I believe Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez, and I also believe that Avenatti has a client who was a victim and a witness, and I believe there are countless other witnesses, some of whom are on the record sharing that Kavanaugh spent much of his high school and college times "incoherently drunk". Something else he's denied. His main problem, and that of the GOP and religious right who support him, is that he is a known, proven liar (can you say Democratic judiciary strategy memos and torture memos?), and like his idol, DJT, he's going to keep lying until there are consequences. And in this case, the consequences ought to be that he doesn't get the SCOTUS brass ring. If he's lucky, maybe he'll keep his DC Circuit gig.
33
Kavanaugh needs to withdraw. Then Trump needs to nominate someone else. The confirmation process can happen after the midterms....karma!
17
Stephens' apt description of Cruz almost permits me to forgive his previous lapses of judgment in the op-eds he's penned in which he espouses conservative values while shamefully overlooking the absence of conservative ethics on display for too many years dating back to Cheney and Rumsfeld with the baton handed to McConnell whose ruthless scorn for bi-partisanship, advise and consent began the day he declared his sole aim was to see Obama fail. Remarkable statesmanship from one who denied Merrick Garland confirmation hearings over an astounding eleven month period and yet, legitimate doubts notwithstanding, wishes to ignore deeply unsettling concerns and quickly install Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court bench.
17
Please, people! The Rosenstein razzmatazz is designed to be a shiny object for media to spend time on as the Kavanaugh appointment gets darker and dirtier. The WH dearly wants its base to stop seeing the women's accusations.
33
I have been puzzled by the obvious and unprecedented campaign to push Kavanaugh into the Supreme Court. I had never before seen a massive campaign bus for a candidate. Let alone one that had”women for Kavanaugh “ in giant letters. None of his decisions on the circuit court are exactly pro-woman. So I became curious about his Georgetown Prep background and current RC thinking on women’s rights. I found this source on the net about women barred from priesthood, and I hope every United States citizen reads it before Kavanaugh is appointed to interpret laws for all women in the country. He says GP was the source of his moral foundation. Read this: http/www.ncronline.org.news/theology/why-no-women-priests-papal-theologian-explains. It explains why Kavanaugh might view women as subject to men. It disturbed me profoundly, and I was raised Catholic.
22
It's all too obvious that most people were not meant to be celibate, and those who choose that life are liable to a kink that prefers "purity" - hence young boys and girls - or who don't really like women.
Hypocrisy seems to be "better" than (a) tolerate women and people who are different and (b) anyone who is a Democrat. There is no evil greater than voting for a Democrat, you see.
6
@Claire Green: I am sorry, the above online address cited is incorrect: no-women-priests should be not-women-priests. In the article, the papal theologian says that while women’s brains are not suited to the logical syllogism demanded by the job of priesthood, they are privileged to have a more intimate relationship with Jesus Christ, to touch him, to wipe his feet with their hair and to kiss his feet. The papal theologian doesn’t bother to say women do these acts symbolically as The Magdalen did. It makes me shudder, it is such sexualization of women’s spirituality. I can only imagine how this is interpreted in a boys’ school.
1
There's no need for an FBI investigation: The media hounds will knock on every door and pursue every lead at private expense. To that end, I have listened carefully to Mr. Farrow's comments about his efforts to corroborate Dr. Ford's account. He has left plenty of room for inferences that he has sources of corroboration who refuse to go public, even anonymously, given the abuse they would suffer. If at least one of them can specifically confirm Judge Kavanaugh's presence at either of the events he says he did not attend, his nomination is dead.
13
One thing that has emerged with blinding clarity is that Kavanaugh lies a lot. He has always lied. His loyalty to the extreme "Republican" clique is unswerving. When it comes to torture, absolute presidential power, spying on Democrats, or doing the bidding of the powerful trickleuppers and "Christians" who want to criminalize poverty and deny the vote to "those people" he does his masters' bidding. Or, perhaps, it would be fair to say that he has been one of the masters. Surprising he had a debt problem.
The sexual material is just the latest wrinkle in his willingness to lie and conceal for advantage. His Republican buddies haven't an ounce of moral fiber in their willingness to rule as a minority single party as long as they can keep power and wealth in the hands of their "side".
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
162
Agree that he lies as demonstrated by Harris questioning. That should disqualify him and I fear too much weight is placed on the upcoming testimony and not on the previous questioning and his hiding of his contempt for women’s independence over and above his views on Roe vs Wade.
12
Republicans had better be careful what they wish for. If Kavanaugh is appointed the gloves are really going to come off. Suppose, for example, that in 2020 a Democrat is elected President and Democrats take control of the House and Senate. Certainly not an unreasonable scenario. Their obvious next move is to expand the Supreme Court to 11 members. If necessary, 13. Nobody who sees Trump as the disaster he is -- certainly a majority of Americans -- is going to have any problem with that.
And in the wake of the Republican's Garland-Gorsuch shell game -- well why should they?
40
Excellent conversation as usual. One or both of you voiced ideas and opinions that I also have about the subjects and people under discussion. Thank you. Now I'm feeling better.
22
Judge Kavanaugh seeks a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. He bears the burden of proving himself worthy. This includes dispelling the cloud over him that formed when allegations of sexual misconduct became public. He could go a long way towards clearing the air by insisting on an investigation by the FBI. Not only could an investigation potentially clear his name, it would show his commitment to the search for truth through a fair process. That he has not done so does not speak well of his qualifications as a jurist.
858
@kjb I couldn’t agree more. Kavanaugh claims he wants to clear his good name. Yet he refuses an FBI investigation, a polygraph, and the appearance of witnesses to the alleged events. Instead he goes on FoxNews. Thus shows only his fealty to the Trump government and its small concept of America. He must be rejected.
13
@kjb
You judge too quickly and condemn without justification.
If everyone who Ms. Ford claims was at the gathering
continues to say they have no memory of it then what
can the F.B.I. reveal ?
Perhaps, perhaps Ms. Ford, after fleeing the gathering
made a phone call via a public phone to her house
and that phone call is on record somewhere some
36 years later...
Lie Detectors only show the person does not have
an emotional reaction to the question that may or may
not be different than those to previous questions.
So if you believe what you are claiming, a Lie Detector
will detect nothing.
2
@kjb: Understanding that there cannot be an FBI Investigation speaks for him as a Jurist. The FBI already declined to do such an investigation. It isn't their job. They cannot do it (at least not within the boundaries of our legal system - if that still means anything to the lefties...).
Gail put Bret in the same box all Republicans occupy: Hypocrisy.
As much as he says/believes Cruz is a snake, Bret would vote for him to support his Republican ideology. Sound familiar?
That's because to promote their version of "Christianity," Evangelical Christians can support Trump, can support a foul mouthed, thrice married, prolific lying, lecherous, sleazeball who can barely keep his hands off his own daughter.
And Bret's hypocrisy also rings familiar because Republicans can betray (actually reveal) their pretensions of patriotism, pretensions of fiscal responsibility, pretensions of honor, pretensions to duty and oath of office, all to support and protect Trump, to support their ideology - an ideology which can be summed up as the rule of the minority over the majority.
And the minority which Republicans serve, the minority whose rule they impose is not that of their voters (older white men), but the minority of the 1%, the super wealthy who want even more.
On a different point. Bret says Kavanaugh is entitled to a presumption of innocence. Why? The Senate hearing is not a court of law, far from it. The Senate hearing is a TV reality show produced and marketed by the Republicans. Dr. Blasey's assertion should be given the same level of respect of credibility as Kavanaugh's denial. Nothing should be presumed.
If the hearing were going to be fair and in search of the truth the Senate would order an FBI investigation, other witnesses would be invited/subpoenaed.
43
The Kavanaugh situation is not neutral and baseless. The fact that Blasey sought treatment, therapy, for the incident in 2012 and that her therapist has notes swings the pendulum in the other direction. That's an inconvenient fact that the GOP refuses to acknowledge but it's in front of all of us. Regardless of your politics or anything else, that is enough to say that the charge has merit and that the candidate for SCOTUS does not.
372
@DenisPombriant
Kavanaugh was on the Appeals Court by 2012.
Perhaps Ms. Ford thought he should not be
and not be nominated for the Supreme Court sometime
later.
Why does the failure of anyone at the gathering to
substantiate Ms. Ford's claims not bother you.
Why does her inability to explain why she was at
the gathering, who invited her, how she got there,
where it was, when it was, and how she got home
after she fled the party - not bother you ?
1
@DenisPombriantTo say nothing about the lie detector.
1
@DenisPombriant-There's also other instances which reveal Kavanaugh has lied and perjured himself. I found it fascinating and revealing to watch these clips from the Senate's hearing and Kavanaugh answers through the lens and analysis of a body language expert.
3
The progressives are only progressive about the national debt, borrowing, reckless spending, and utter social irresponsibility.
We have never heard them asking for the across-the-board tax increases to pay for all the perks and benefits they demand and request.
Without such a crucial step there is no progressiveness but just pure selfishness.
We indeed put the progressives in power in 2009 to stop the wars, imprison the culprits who saddled us with the longest foreign conflicts in the national history, sentence the villains that engineered the housing bubble and the Great Recession, keep the well-paying American jobs at home, kick the lobyists out of Washington D.C. and force the government to work on behalf of the fellow Americans, not the global corporations.
Maybe those results were achieved in your imaginary world, but not in ours…
That’s why the Democrats were kicked out of power in 2010.
Franklin D. Roosevelt milked the Great Depression to keep the old Democrats for two decades in power.
The Obama Administration wasted such a strategic advantage in two short years.
For God’s sake, he personally hired the people like Hillary Clinton and Timothy Geithner who dragged us into the Iraq War and the Great Recession.
Those incapable of preventing the problems don’t know how to solve them either…
@Kenan Porobic
Republicans ruin the economy, and Democrats fix it. Your narrative is wildly off base and the facts do not support.
13
@Susan Anderson
Dear Susan,
according to your displayed logic, the Democrats fix the economy, the Republicans ruin it, and that's why the voters periodically switch between those two parties in letting them govern.
Do you understand what the implied message is or your personal opinion about you fellow countrymen?
Please read the dictionary definitions of hubris, prejudice and bias...
By the way, every time you read my comments, rest assured those are based solely on the facts.
@Kenan Porobic -- by claiming that Hillary Clinton and Timothy Geithner "dragged us into the Iraq War and the Great Recession" you seem to be ignoring Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, GWB, and Alan Greenspan.
12
If you don't think we can give enough money to the wealthy and you think regulations, pretty much of any kind, are useless, then you must be sleeping well at night. The Supreme Court and federal judges are rapidly being stacked in your favor. The rest of us should be very, very worried about what those in control of our government are doing.
Misogyny. Racism. Inequality of all kinds. No major new infrastructure projects. Degradation of public education. Adulteration of health care. Threats to the ACA, Medicaid, and Social Security. An exploding deficit and national debt. Destruction of the environment for short-term interests and greed. Inaction on global warming and climate change. Trade wars. Eroding relations with our historical allies. Continuing wars. A likely impending crash of our superheated economy, with associated job losses. The list goes on.
Do you think we are really better off now than we were two years ago?
We don't have much more time. The clock is ticking. Work for your local Democrats getting people registered and voting. Do what you can. Democrats need to win elections, at all levels. It's the only way out.
60
@Blue Moon
Earth has the last and only vote, and it bats 1000. It's about to reject its apex predator. If we can't pay attention to the climate now, it will get much worse (it will do that anyway, but we could try to work together to halt the devastation we're jetting for). Good-bye mod cons. When the grid fails, the internet will be useless, and 2D delusions will be replaced by reality, real hard difficult reality.
Lies only work when there's somebody listening. Reality is real, and will win in the end. It's just a question of if we want to go down fooling ourselves or look for a sustainable way to live.
15
@Susan Anderson
I don't think climate change per se or climate-change-induced nuclear war will be the end of all of us, but it will be a significant temporal glitch in our progression to extinction. That will happen with the development of sophisticated AI some centuries from now, because we are incapable of stopping ourselves (everyone wants a better and better life, right?) and the military will never let it go. But talking about AI in here usually gets no traction, so I'll leave it at that.
Were I the recipient of untrue allegations of sexual harassment or any other untrue allegations that might possibly be seen as against the law and could result in jail time, I would INSIST upon an investigation by any law enforcement entity, from the FBI on down. Why Kavanaugh hasn’t done this is what really interests me.
48
@Delcie In this instance, the FBI does the background investigation ... and quite possibly they will find that the allegations are true.
Why else would any woman put herself out there to be pilloried by people like you who have already made up their minds minus any valid evidence that he did not do what he is accused of doing?
1
The (unrelated) accusations against Kavanaugh & Rosenstein could both be looked into by the FBI. Those in power don't want legitimate investigations here -> ergo the FBI has been politicized.
10
Thank you Mr. Stephens for one of the best descriptions of Cruz ----ever!
10
Bret: on Kavanagh and accusers, you maintain the most evenhanded judgment so far from any conservative commentator I have read .
Thank you thank you for recognizing the need for an FBI investigation.
6
Re/ Bret’s concern about maintaining kavanaugh’s “presumption of innocence”- doesn’t that apply to criminal trials? This ain’t that: we’re deciding whether someone’s a fit candidate for a politically, morally, ethically charged position. We use all our senses for that, including an examination of hearsay. Sorry Bret.
16
Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed because of these accusations. The next Republican nominees are also tainted and can't get confirmed before the midterms. The Democrats win both the House and the Senate, refuse to conduct any business during the lame duck session and will not confirm anyone until they win the presidency in 2020 and at long last confirm Garland.
Could happen?
14
@Dennis Since the repubs in congress sat on their hands the whole 8 years we chose President Obama, they have experience on how this works. The only difference is that they did it based on racism. Dems will do it to protect the country.
1
Kavanaugh’s choice to appear on Fox was stunningly self-defeating.
The candidate needed to appeal to the entire country.
Instead he doubled-down with a partisan minority, on the network known for dubious propaganda.
81
I was born in Texas and lived there all but a decade of my 67 years. I am amazed, for once, to TOTALLY agree with Bret Stephens! Go Beto!
21
This conversation would deserve to be as amusing as it is if we were not experiencing the reality of it in real time.
Spot on description of Ted Cruz, BTW.
Perhaps the only thing worse is the fact that people who support Cruz, who support the phony republican angst over Kavanaugh and support Trump are really very proud of themselves.
That fact is perhaps the single worst commentary on the state of the nation.
18
@TDurk I take some small solance on the lead Beto O'Rourke has over cruz in Texas and on Robert Muehler's continued investigation.
2
Kavanaugh is in lock step with the new perspective on investigation that Trump has led us to by virtue of the Russia investigation. If a party vehemently asserts his/her innocence in the face of accusations (i.e. Russian collusion; predatory sexual behavior), then he/she should scream demands for an investigation, rather than thwarting or undermining or simply not calling for one.
24
Bret's description of Cruz: priceless!
Complementing how indelible a memory of traumatic events can be, is the power of the human mind to erase all memory of behavior that doesn't jibe with one's self-image.
46
These conversations between the two of you are like manna from heaven. It's a bright spot in this chaos to read reasonable exchanges between blue and red. I hope the US survives to return to being capable of more of this.
10
Bret Stephens’ thoughtful and apt description of Ted Cruz is so welcome. It’s well worth sharing with all your friends, relatives, and acquaintances in Texas.
84
As usual, Bret Stephens tries to appear "reasonable" and "fair" by saying things like "Mark Judge, should testify as well," "the F.B.I. ought to conduct an expedited investigation," and "but we might try to reach the “clear and convincing” evidence standard often used in civil or administrative cases."
But notice what's missing: He never says "And the Republicans are wrong for not doing these things."
Like most conservative pundits, he clings to tribal fealty even while acknowledging that his side is wrong.
Worse, he never owns up to the fact that he and his fellow conservative pundits share in the blame for all the unfair and unethical things that the Republicans have been doing over the past decade. Why didn't he speak out against Birtherism? Why didn't he speak out about Merrick Garland? Who cares if the Republicans destroyed all functionality and propriety in Congress as long as they kept refusing to work with Pres Obama? Why didn't he speak out against "fake news" and "althernative facts?"
Now all of a sudden, he wants everyone to believe that he cares about truth, honesty, and fairness?
Sorry, but Stephens and the rest of the conservative punditocracy don't deserve a mulligan. It's meaningless to latch onto the Democrat's reasonable talking points just for show, because that does nothing to break through the Repub's stone wall of refusing to accept anything that Dems say as legitimate.
They'll ignore you just like they ignore us; what good does that do?
146
The echo chamber Libs can’t help yourselves. Forget about meeting Bret halfway. You can’t even meet him at 90% Left. Her allegations need to at least meet the “credible” standard. To me, that means something that at least places him and her at the same party. Duke Lacrosse case and UVa Rolling Stone vase both prove accusers “mis-remember” or downright fabricate. I think she is being used as a pawn. I will be surprised if she testifies at the end of the day.
Once Trump vouched for Kavanaugh,
his nomination was in question.
42
We can only hope this SCOTUS appointment galvanizes the virtuous against the Good Ol' Boys network.
Vote Blue in every election.
42
I agree with everything you say except the line about the "Ultimate Trumpian dilemma".
The "Ultimate Trumpian dilemma" is that he exists. An obese tower of belly and bile, filled with equal parts rage and cheeseburgers. He belongs behind glass down the street at the Smithsonian with the sign: "The End of Evolution: How doing everything wrong gets you everything there is."
14
Bret, I am not usually a fan of yours, but your description of Ted Cruz is absolutely priceless.
14
Bret writes:
"But that’s not what this moment is about. I think it’s about the truth and who is telling it: Blasey or Kavanaugh."
No, it's about whether Kavanaugh is telling the truth -- he is the one seeking a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
And throughout this proceeding, in proceedings for earlier confirmation, and on Fox News, it just seems like the man can't tell the truth. His work in the Bush administration? His gambling? His debts? His drinking? He and his enablers obfuscate, dissemble, dodge and throw the base canned meat.
In short, he is a man with a shadowy life being propped up by the right as a puppet, and we can't trust a thing that comes out of his mouth.
198
@Todd -- indeed ... and of the many glaring issues with Kavanaugh his credit card debt is one that could easily be proven as whatever it is, and the Whitehouse dissembling on this topic is obviously on par with "my dog ate it."
We don't know how much, if any, was gambling debt ... gambling was a supposition by Sheldon Whitehouse that remains unsubstantiated.
But the Whitehouse claim that this was "baseball tickets" is either utterly preposterous, or evidence of some sort of money laundering, pay-off, or fraud.
The most expensive season ticket you can buy to the Nationals is $6,560 per season. Really good season tickets are more commonly $4,000. There's no way to get to 200 k$ with those.
Conceivably Kavanaugh was renting boxes -- that can run to real money. But if so, that raises some very big questions indeed about Kavanaugh -- who was in those boxes? Was Kavanaugh even in those boxes?
Box tickets are fungible -- they are commonly a semi-discreet coin of pay-offs, bribery, and money-laundering.
There's even a possible two-fer here: Bret paid off gambling losses with box tickets! Blackmail payments also come to mind.
This all stinks bigly.
13
The Trump Administration provides the best example outside the big top of a three ring circus, and that's right to sign over the entrance reading 'sold out'.
5
The Republicans, every inch still the party of Richard Nixon, I am afraid still believe the defense that was made of Nixon's failed nomination of Carswell to the Supreme Court. In that case it was that as Carswell was "mediocre" didn't "mediocre...people...deserve representation.." Kavanaugh is exactly the kind of person, the frat boy, that supports the Republicans and if he did not deserve to be appointed as is argued by commenters here then, in their minds, they would not ever be represented. Their fear is palpable.
3
In case anyone forgot, President Trump is a reality TV show star.
He still is and gets huge, bigly ratings every day.
His most recent producer, Bill Shine from Fox News, has been busy this week with The Kavanaugh Show. Guest appearance by Rosenstein yesterday was a ratings success.
This is how the Trump Administration handles the serious issues of the day. They don't diddle with facts or investigations or due process. They produce and direct reality TV moments aka the news for public consumption.
Bill Shine and Don McGahn are holed up in the White House getting Kavanaugh ready for his starring role on Thursday. They could care less about the truth. It's all about the optics and nothing more.
And the GOP are the executive producers of this drama.
They are not governing in any sense of that word. They are incapable of respect and due process and proper and educated consideration of any issue.
This is why we have a chaotic shambles of a White House and Congress.
32
I can't imagine any Princetonian who hasn't now added a codicil to his Will, to leave a decent Scotch to Bret Stephens for this takedown of Ted Cruz. Rumsfeld had been shaming enough, but then along came Sammy Alito, to shine as the pluperfect mockery of the mind that he is. But Cruz. Not even Iago could suffer an association with him, and that boy got around.
17
The Senate has been filled and dominated by old, white men who have long lost the ability to connect with all voters, if they ever had the ability. They have repeatedly demonstrated a lack of respect for their colleagues (nevertheless, she persisted = McConnell), a need to dominate women's lives (Roe), as well as a refusal to move forward, clinging to backward ways (the entire Trump/Koch canon).
Our country needs to rid ourselves of these old, doddering men who themselves no longer reflect the majority of citizens. VOTE them OUT on November 6, 2018.
VOTE DEMOCRAT on November 6, 2018, EVERY SINGLE POSITION, EVERY SINGLE BALLOT, EVERY SINGLE CONTEST
25
The real issue is not, as Gails says "whether a respected judge can be held accountable for a drunken sexual assault he made as a teenager." Not all teenagers behave this way - by a long shot, first of all. So, if you believe Kavanaugh did this, this says ALOT about his character. And anybody who ever did this, sober or not, should never be allowed anywhere near a bench. And second, if he did it, he is lying about it now - repeatedly. This second point seems to get overlooked alot. Don't judges, of all people, need to be able to be trusted to tell the truth?
29
Give this guy a taste of his own medicine. Read the questions that Kavanaugh wrote for President Clinton's inquisition, then use them as a template for questions to ask him on Thursday.
Turnabout seems more than fair to me.
84
There isn't going to be an FBI investigation. That's the whole problem. McConnell doesn't want to get to the bottom of these accusations. He wants to present the public with a fait accompli as far from the midterm elections as he can. Unless key Republican senators rebel soon that's where we're headed. If he's got the votes he'll ram her on through.
17
On sexual assault and harassment allegations: too often they will be he-said/she-said events, with no definitive proof. This plays to the advantage of the accused when it comes to conviction, but likely hurts both the accused and the accuser when it comes to reputation (some will suspect the accused is lying, some the accuser). In general, the accuser is at a disadvantage, because her reputation will be hurt by those who don't believe her and she is unlikely to get justice if her allegations are true. It's pretty much a no-win situation—and sexual abusers rely on this fact. They know few women will want to risk sacrificing their reputations in an effort that is almost certain to fail.
Ultimately, though, when allegations like this come forward against someone seeking high office, the prudent thing to do is reject the candidate. Yes, it could be unfair to the candidate. But there are plenty of good people to fill jobs, and we are better off getting someone who can be trusted by all than someone whose reputation is in question by many.
Further, this points to the importance of choosing candidates who are impeccable in character, who are thoroughly vetted, and who are likely to have the support of the majority of the population. The politicization of the process, where Republicans refuse to grant hearings to moderate Democratic nominees then appoint candidates approved by the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society—groups that support polarizing positions—must end.
29
@617to416
If you honestly think the last Obama nomination was any sort of moderate, you were seriously misled about Barack Obama. All he ever cared about was placing liberal ideologues on he bench at whatever level he could.
1
If I had been accused of these acts and categorically knew that I did not do them, I would welcome and encourage an FBI investigation, a polygraph, and any additional information regarding the alleged events. I would not get teary-eyed on TV as though I was just realizing that life can be difficult. I would want to clear my name not only for the opportunity to be confirmed for this position but more importantly in Kavanaugh’s case, to maintain the respect, esteem, and love of my wife and daughters.
563
@Concerned MD: The FBI cannot do such an investigation. They are not in charge of it. Mr. Kavanaugh has offered to testify under oath and would have liked to do so a while ago - if only Mrs. Ford would actually make an accusation. You can only provide "additional information" if you know what you have been accused of. But we don't know anything: when did it happen? Where did it happen? Who was there? The only other person who Mrs. Ford pointed says the same thing as Mr. Kavanough himself: The thing never happened....
1
@Frank continues to assert the false notions that the FBI has refused to investigate or is precluded legally from investigating or it is not mandated to investigate. All completely false assertions. The committee chair could pick up the phone right now and call the FBI and ask them to investigate. It would be within their mandate and right up their alley. Why does Frank continue to make these false assertions? Because lying has become an acceptable and standard procedure to acolytes of Trump. Shameless, remorseless, self-serving, bald faced lies are his stock in trade.
I agree with that description of Ted Cruz.
Separately, I also like Beto O’Rourke.
However, I'm not a Texas voter. They've done stuff like re-elect Rick Perry as Governor to an unprecedented third four-year term by a large (55%) margin.
The large numbers of undecided voters is bad news for the challenger. That is what polling sees when people don't like their party's candidate, but they normally come home to the Party anyway on Election Day. It is the "hold your nose" or "Blue Dog" theory of elections.
Much as I detest Cruz and like the new guy, I like realism more. It isn't looking good, and pretending otherwise serves no good purpose, may even harm the good guy.
25
@Mark Thomason
Dear Mr. Thomason, your idea of "reality" is self defeating prophecy. Do you think for one minute that those of us in Texas who are fighting to escape one-party rule don't realize we are facing horrific odds? If you REALLY detest Cruz and like the new guy, you would do much better to send a donation, however small , to Beto's war chest as he fights the reality of Cruz's multiple PAC sources!
4
On the days when you two have a dialogue, I get a cup of coffee and begin my day with you. I'm guaranteed to get just the lift I need to get going. The fact that two people from different political perspectives can regularly discuss issues in a respectful, intelligent, reasoned, and very human way, gives me hope and the gumption to start the day... given the incredibly bizarre times we live in. I love spending time with you two... and that's not the coffee talking.
51
@Thomas Wharton
Well said, sir. They give me a lift too.
2
Confirmation of a nominee to the Supreme Court is about what is good for the country, the Court and respect for the rule of law. Only a nominee beyond reproach will serve these interests. Bret focuses on the individual and continues to defend Kavanaugh using concepts like “presumption of innocence” that are appropriate only for a criminal prosecution. Kavanaugh eagerly sought this nomination at a time when politics, especially in matters of sex, are at a boiling point. To adapt a saying popular among frat boys, Kavanaugh was “asking for it.”
42
Curious, isn’t it, that Republicans want to fire the law and order guy who is defending the US from foreign interference, while they want a Supreme Court position for the guy who would undo the balance of powers set out in the US Constitution.
114
Like Bret, I recognize that Brett Kavanaugh's reputation is, in a sense, on trial for its life. I take that very seriously.
But like Gail, I keep coming back to the fact that it isn't a trial, nor should it be a rubber-stamping in the absence of any manifest unfitness; that "Nobody deserves a lifetime Supreme Court nomination".
Much depends on the hearings that lie ahead, but if they and the other emerging details of Kavanaugh's formative years make it hard to conclude that this is someone who should sit on the highest court in the land, then the committee should decline confirmation.
As far as I know (not far, I realize), there need not be a vote on this or that accusation, nor are the senators forbidden like jurors to consider anything but what has transpired in the hearing room. It should be enough for them to consider everything they know and all the impressions they have received and vote accordingly on the question of confirmation.
10
@Longestaffe -- this constant concern from the right about "reputation" betrays a very sad thing: they see a man's reputation as their prime concern ... the reality does not matter, eh?
The idea that Kavansugh will be "ruined" by Blasey's accusation is absurd.
Many men who have been accused of sexual assault have lost their jobs, but Kavanaugh won't -- he can return to his life-time appointment as a federal judge.
Trump was not "ruined" by the Access Hollywood tape where he brags about groping women, and 15+ have come forth with accusations that he did -- though it has generated widespread disgust and derision.
If Kavanaugh believes he has been libeled then he is free to sue. Remember that Trump said that all the women who accused him were liars, and he would sue?
12
Come on, Bret! You seem to have a pretty clear take on Cruz. But you stop short of saying you wouldn’t vote for him if his was a deciding vote? You do see that this is exactly what’s going on with congressional Republicans supporting Trump, right? When given the choice of decency or power, they’re choosing power. I believe if we all supported politicians who were decent, honest, fair, moral, intelligent and competent, we might elect individuals with differing views, but we would have a congress that could work together and get things done.
249
@WDP Your comment is inspiring on an otherwise dispiriting day: our absurdly grandiose Chief Executive makes a fool of himself at the U.N. and is openly laughed at; our "advise and consent" process is so broken that the nominee goes on a right-wing TV channel and has a tearful breakdown like a suitor on The Bachelorette who didn't get the rose he felt he deserved.
I have one request for today's Republicans--GROW UP and take the government of America and its people seriously! Stop thinking like greedy toddlers, "Me! Me! Me! What's in this for ME and my wealthy white bros!"
2
I have a couple of observations. Regarding Trump's radio silence, there is something wrong when a president is praised for acting presidential. Collins has it correct when she points out that the Kavanaugh imbroglio is also about class. Although I would opine that it is also about lack of class.
Finally, the Gosar campaign here in Arizona. Gosar's district covers some of the most right wing reactionary parts of the state. It is so heavily right wing that the Democrats will provide moral support but no financial support to any opponent of the Republican. Gosar is the closest thing to a shoo in around here which makes the siblings' commercial even more bizarre.
24
@athenasowl -- Trump's radio silence? What?
4
@athenasowl - From afar, it appears several Gosar siblings (there are 10 Gosar kids, right ?) may live in/near the district he seeks to represent and have professional/personal reasons to publicly ensure there is no conflating their own politics with this brother's.
4
@athenasowl Hopefully, voters will listen to the siblings who caution them not to vote for their brother. Who knows him better than the brothers and sisters who grew up with him?
2
As Gail says: " Nobody deserves a lifetime Supreme Court nomination. This isn’t like the right to buy a home or to be employed. "
And aptly, Bret introduces into the conversation 'serpents', which it is apparent Judiciary Committee Trumpists (there are no GOP'ers anymore) would vote to confirm, as long as the serpent had been added to the Federalist Society dream list.
It's absurd that if this same set of allegations against Kavanaugh were part of anyone else's history who was trying to just get a government security clearance, such clearance would be rejected; but Trumpists are fine fine fine with it all - let's hurry up and vote, before we find out more - elevating someone like this who has been chastised by both wings of his current peers for defective jurisprudence in not following precedent nor facts in evidence.
No one will be able to over-rule his making of new precedent - creating new law - if Kav makes it to SCOTUS. His character defects should prevent that, and djt can pick another Federalist Society dream lister who's not so flawed.
The important thing is to be sure Mitch McConnell, Lindsay Graham, Franklin Graham, Ralph Reed, and Pastor Robert Jeffress all stay tightly lashed together for this little episode of Reality POTUS - they so richly deserve each other.
As for Cruz, Bret colorful description left out: smarmy condescending self-righteousness.
86
@R. Law...How do you really feel about Cruz? What I find discordant about Cruz is that he was educated at Princeton and Harvard Law. Neither one is known for producing extreme right wingers.
1
This should give all us us time to pause- then think, that these lifetime appointments or those who spend 40 years in the house or senate, no longer is appropriate to a healthy government nor is it a right to be defended under any circumstance. If and when we ever get past the trumpian debacle and the civil war being raged in the legislature, perhaps then, a healthy dose of hindsight might provide the future x-gens and millennials to do what our generations could not. Make government work for the all the people. Those with and without money or class or privilege.
62
Thank you for this thoughtful discussion. You gave voice to a lot of the thoughts I've been mulling over about Ford v. Kavanaugh. There needs to be a full investigation, and they need to table the whole confirmation process and vote until that happens. I don't want to live in a society where accusations alone bring someone down (or are completely dismissed.) That will hurt the progress that's been made on women's rights.
35
Suppose Kavanaugh were applying for a job as a public high school teacher. That's a very "low-level" government job, but at least in PA, it requires both a state and a federal background check and criminal clearances. Now imagine that, right before you were about to hire him, you received this kind of information - from multiple sources. Would you ignore it on the grounds that he had already passed the background checks (since no criminal charges were filed at the time) and hire him anyway? Or would you check into it further, given that, if true, such behavior would have been in violation of your school district's professional code of conduct, even if said behavior occurred a long time ago? That seems to be the standard that everyone should apply here.
342
@Nancy I was one of those people who hired teachers. With the information we now have about Kavanaugh I would have simply gone on to another candidate. No need for any corroboration. He wouldn't be entitled to a teaching job either.
14
@Nancy It is abundantly clear that Republicans have no "professional code of conduct" so your point is moot in their world. Simply inapplicable.
Their criteria for a SCOTUS justice is: 1. will he uphold Citizens United? 2. will he overturn Roe, either nationally or by allowing states to do so? 3. will he give Trump impunity for any and all crimes that are discovered? 4. will he deem the ACA unconstitutional?
In Kavanaugh they have their perfect candidate and they will do anything to get him on the court.
9
@Barking Doggerel: Right. I know. My husband's in higher ed admin, and it's the same deal there. They've passed over candidates for teaching positions with far less baggage than Kavanaugh brings with him. Because as a teacher or professor, you're supposed to be a "role model," and you influence young people. One wishes that a Supreme Court justice would be viewed the same way.
The accusations flying around are expected, not able to be proved and not able to be defended against. The perfect political hatchet job and one that will only become more and more common in today's era of extreme polarization.
Gail takes the position of guilty unless proven innocent. So many others on the left take a similar view. Thus, we find ourselves in the bowl swirling in that inevitable downward spiral.
2
Using Mitch McConnell logic,I would say that this Supreme Court nomination is too close to the mid-terms to be decided before then. Let the people have their say, then decide who to appoint to thecourt.
386
@Eugene Voce
Using Mitch logic the Supreme Court is an extension of party politics and justices can only be seated when one party controls the Senate and the Presidency. Justice is no longer blind: she wears red glasses and holds a tilted scale.
1
The Kavanaugh thing is really becoming about whether Dianne Feinstein wins or loses. I’m sure she has Stormy Daniels lined-up with lawyer Michael Avenatti claiming that Kavanaugh slipped a three-dollar bill into Stormy’s G-String one night back on December 31, 1999, when she was a 21-year-old pole-dancer dreaming about becoming a porn star and everyone was having a high ol’ time. She wants to sue Kavanaugh for the sawbuck she SHOULD have gotten plus the lost compounded interest.
Kavanaugh will be confirmed long before the midterms and he and Clarence Thomas will toast the women in their lives once annually. Dianne Feinstein will melt away as soon as someone tosses a pail of water on her.
Rosenstein? Trump should have fired him a year ago. But never fear: he can always find a job counseling serial firees on tactics for holding onto jobs whose bosses despise them.
“A serpent covered in Vaseline”. Now, I admit that I’ve never read a more accurate description of Ted Cruz, and I thank Bret for the image. I believe that Republicans will pick up Senate seats in November, enough that I think we can afford to flip one of them Democratic. Here’s hoping that soon we won’t have Ted Cruz to kick around anymore. But let’s not waste him: Clint Eastwood advised us that snakes were “good eatin’” – tastes like chicken only scrape off the Vaseline.
4
@Richard Luettgen: Once again, Richard, true to form, bereft of substance, imbued with the kind of "humor" the depends on ad hominems, derision and contempt. Was there something you wanted to contribute to the discussion, or did you just need to vent spleen while yet again proclaiming your superiority?
The Kavanaugh thing, as you put it, is all about character. Neither we nor the FBI will likely ever get to the bottom of the original specific allegations, but as folks come out of the woodwork to bear witness, and more tales are told, we definitely get a sense of who the man is, partly from who the young man was. Personally speaking, I think we'd be much better off with Stormy Daniels on the top federal bench. Remaining of the Court of Appeals for the rest of his career is by far not the worst fate that could befall Mr. K. You do realize he'd be a critical cog in the machine that would keep Trump in power, out of jail and able to complete the Putinization of America, don't you?
I share your enthusiasm for Bret's riff on Cruz, loved the serpent/vaseline remark, and hope that Texans finally understand he's all hat and no cattle. I don't agree he makes Trump look human, or that he has any ethics at all.
Rosenstein hangs over Trump like the sword of Damocles. He faces extreme risk no matter where he turns. I trust he will be unable to resist shooting himself in the foot yet again, and eagerly await the impending legal cloudburst that will rain on his parade until he melts.
23
@Richard Luettgen: "The Kavanaugh thing" is really about one question: Why won't the Republicans allow the FBI to investigate? What do you think is the answer?
34
@Richard Luettgen
Only in mind compulsively contrarian and stunted blind by partisanship could "The Kavanaugh thing" somehow be about Feinstein. You don't believe that any more than you believe Trump is good for the country, but employ such nonsense to get attention here. Puerile vacancy.
But at least there are not two scoops today. That's progress.
23
"Nobody deserves a lifetime Supreme Court nomination."
All defenders of Kavanaugh forget that simple reality -- this is not a right, this is a privilege being accorded someone who has the character and ability to discharge the duties that accompany that office.
I'll ask this simple question to all his defenders: will it bother you or not if an alcoholic is given a driver's license in the one or two days he's been sober? And don't come back with, what if the alcoholic has recovered and is sober for more than 30 years. The driver's license does not come with decision making authority, just the right to drive. Whereas a seat on the SCOTUS comes with significant decision making authority, such as a woman's right to choose.
Kavanaugh does not deserve a seat. And even if he's seated, he will forever be under a cloud. Just like Thomas. Is that what we want as a country?
153
Kavanaugh may honestly not remember because of alcohol or because it wouldn't stay in his memory as anything more than an adolescent incident. She, however , was obviously traumatized and would more likely remember.
I think the point is that the Supreme Court will be making decisions about women's lives...health care, reproductive choice, etc. Although women are a majority of the population, the court majority is male, and already includes one male who is seen as disrespectful to women.
Unfortunately , perception is critical, and this nominee , no matter how many positive witnesses he has brought forth, he is tainted. I think he should step down.
254
@Jane
Or more likely, if one can believe the accounts, the assault of Dr. Blasey as just a typical Friday night and less successful than most.
4
Brett/Gail, it feels to me like you would each be making different arguments if the judge in question was a hyper liberal rather than a conservative. This I believe IS the problem. Watch John Oliver's recent show where he talks about lifetime appointments on the supreme court. He notes that we are the ONLY country in the developed world that does this. Now that our process of selecting supreme court justices has become COMPLETELY politicized, it is a fair time to reevaluate that policy.
128
@Common Sense Agree -- the lifetime appointment was intended to remove judges from political pressure and it has failed spectacularly to do that, so it should be scrapped for some other scheme, like reasonable term limits staggered to allow for successive presidents to participate equally in appointments.
5
@Common Sense
Sometimes I feel like if we could just get conservatives over their hump about sex, the world would right itself and we'd all be friends.
What Brett Kavanaugh is accused of has nothing to do with sex. It has to do with power and control. I was alive in the 80's and sex was not hard to come by. We were fresh off the cusp of the sexual revolution and we had a lot to prove. SO, drugging women and raping them as has been suggested elsewhere was not necessary. They'd happily have sex with you and move on. I was there. I remember.
The only reason for this type of behavior would have been cruelty, anger and misogyny. And I see that today in Brett Kavanaugh and his behavior so I have no reason to doubt the MULTIPLE accusations.
And yes, I'd feel the same way about a liberal, but our people like Kavanaugh are not usually angry and punishing women except perhaps their wife.
4
I no longer care whether the allegations of sexual assault can be proven. The more people from Kavanaugh's circle in those days we hear from, the more it's evident what kind of person he is. Whether or not he's an attempted rapist, we don't need an entitled, drunken frat boy on the Supreme Court. That is universally the character even those (notably lukewarm) defenders have sketched, and it isn't who I want deciding the highest cases in the land.
This is not a criminal trial. Our representatives are supposed to be deciding whether a nominee is fit to serve us all. Kavanaugh has been revealed even by this rushed process as not the man we need for the job.
475
A senate confirmation hearing isn’t the place to sort out unproven and until now unalleged accusations. It’s simply not the place for that. Courts are the place for that. I know it’s just my opinion, but to me, only an arrest and indictment, a civil court judgement, or a conviction should even be considered. The political arena is not a fair or honest place to come to a determination. You have people who’s primary motivation is to advance their political positions. There are others who see themselves in the accuser and see this as vindication and justice for the wrongs they have endured during their lives. You have others who merely delight in seeing powerful people being brought down. You also have people trying to maintain a status quo. You cannot have a fair hearing from any of these positions. Courts have rules and standards for impartiality and conflict of interest which is more than lost on this political process. This is why courts should arbitrate justice and the senate should base its confirmation on the facts of Kavanaugh’s career instead of holding a show trial that it cannot and will not be able to pull off in any respectable manner.
6
Re ted cruz- I keep remembering how close he came to the Republican presidential nomination. And how we kept saying please please pick even trump over cruz.
I still feel the same.
24
We should also remember some other critical context.
Trump is 'President' by virtue of widespread voter suppression laws in Republican-governed states, Kremlin campaign assistance, America's black-box computer-assisted vote-counting machines, the slave-state-sponsored Electoral College...and by virtue of the world's most effective propaganda-industrial-machine since the Third Reich ceased operations.
All of Trump's Supreme Court appointees are supremely illegitimate.
Furthermore, the refusal to hear, review and seat Merrick Garland by the Grand Old Pirates was nothing less than a coup d'etat....one of many cheerfully orchestrated Republican overthrows of representative government.
And then there is Mitch McConnell's obliteration of the 60-vote bipartisan rule for confirming Supreme Court judges; Republicans will blindly blame Harry Reid for doing that for lower level court appointments, but it is in fact little Mitch McConnell who turned the United States Supreme Court into another branch of the Republican National Committee, not Harry Reid.
And now back at the main attraction, the Republican Party wants their medieval Federalist Society frat boy defender of torture, heavy drinking and male teenage wasteland behavior to rule with an iron legal fist over the nation's uteruses, healthcare access, voting rights, and the country's completely corrupted electoral process.
The American people need to stand up and tell these Grand Old Patriarchs to shove it.
November 6 2018
618
@Socrates I so appreciate your comments. This one is especially so spot on.
12
@Socrates
Have missed reading you, Socrates.
4
I think Gail's explanation that a Supreme Court nomination is not an entitlement but a privilege ought to be announced at the beginning of the Thursday hearing.
On the other hand, Brett's multiple descriptions of the Texas oily - man Cruz - especially as the love child of Swaggart and the Jack Nicholson character in The Shining - exceed all others - and there have been a lot.
422
@cheryl "love child" is a compliment. In his case, "hate child" is the proper term.
3