It this simple:
Articles of Impeachment: Resolved, Brett Michael Kavanaugh, United States Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, is impeached for lying while under Oath, and that the following be exhibited to the United States Senate:
While providing testimony on April 27, 2004 and May 9, 2006, Brett Michael Kavanaugh, in violation of his constitutional oath to tell the truth did make false statements, willfully corrupted and manipulated the judicial process of the United States for his personal gain and gain of his political party in that he willfully provided false and misleading testimony concerning his knowledge and actions regarding (1) illegally derived documents from staff of Democratic member of the Senate Judiciary Committee; (2) the rules governing detention and torture of enemy combatants; (3) involvement with the nomination of James Pickering as Judge on the Fourth Circuit Court.
In doing this, Brett Michael Kavanaugh has undermined the integrity of his office, brought disrepute on the United States Court of Appeals and betrayed his trust as a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals and acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Brett Michael Kavanaugh, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.
11
"I'll listen to that lady, but..." should be the tagline of the Republican party.
8
Lindsey Graham apparently learned NOTHING from the courage of his friend, John McCain.
10
Kavanot!
Women rise. Act as one lot.
Demand an explanation.
Ask why Kavanaugh did not
ask for the investigation.
Had he done so he would be
“supreme” in his decision.
He would seek truth, you see,
remove any suspicion.
Suspicion that he hides a fact,
that he lied under oath,
that he may have done a sexual act
that all of us do loath.
Republicans. Do not be blind.
If you push through this vote,
the voters will not be so kind:
they will be at your throat.
You and your chosen nominee
can save your reputation.
Be smart. Relent. Set voters free.
Withdraw Brett’s nomination.
What’s there to lose? You only win.
Ask Mitch for a replacement.
The country’s patience’s wearing thin.
It wants some self-effacement.
Go with the times. Be somewhat “woke”.
If not, you will be done.
The people’s vote will make you choke.
Seek truth and you'll have won!
4
You keep referring to her as Dr. Blasey. Isn’t her last name Ford?
resend with edit"
the ghost of jefferson who insisted that "an informed electorate" was necessary to protect and preserve government "by the people," must be in tears at the spectacle of the ignorance that has crippled our national debate and the partisanship that eroded both the integrity of, and our trust in, the constitutionally established institutions that form the foundation of our democracy.
meanwhile, the ghost of lenin is dancing, the same erosion of trust spells success for his plan to subvert democracy, an effort that began with the birth of the soviet union and has proceeded with agents both planted and transient, moles within walls and organizers in the streets (wads of cash at the ready) and, as he said, "useful idiots," home grown, who can be drawn into abetting the subversive effort by temptation, appeals to self-interest. sure, "better" would be better, but, back to jefferson, what we've got is there because we put it there, we have, as he said, "the government we deserve." so stow the red MAGA hats and the rhetoric of "resistance" and let's have hats and slogans that say "IT'S ON US!,"
1
NO ON KAVANAUGH. After reading this Thursday's NYT, I no longer think Donald Trump is fit or legitimately entitled to nominate ANYBODY for ANYTHING, let alone a dodgy character like Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court. The GOP "guys" are so complicit that the only way to save themselves is to force Trump to resign in order to show a modicum of patriotism.
Also, this is a JOB INTERVIEW. The American people don't owe squat to Kavanaugh. If we don't like his tie, we don't have to hire him. We don't think he is honest.
7
Nice to see that the Dems are wanting to change an international human right, ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”). To Innocent, until Accused. Enough of the theatrics , Senator Grassley, Senator McConnell, bring it to the Harry Reid Nuclear Option already.
2
Lindsey Graham has it wrong as usual: “This has been a drive-by shooting” but not at Kavanaugh but at Blasey Ford led by Grassley and Hatch, to demean and discredit Professor Blasey. The good old boys’ network is up to their usual antics of bloating their egos at the thought of a woman who will speak the truth about a grievous wrong done to her. Graham says demeaningly that he “will listen to the lady.” How sanctimonious! That this lady as Graham calls her may put their calendar in disarray. Hypocrites, the lot of them.
8
I'm 73 years old, worked for my country for most of my life and I could never have imagined I would say this: I am ashamed to be an American. If I were younger and in better health I would have moved to Canada or Europe but I can't now...
My brother made an unrelated joke about going to sleep in Europe and waking up in the US which immediately made me think of going to sleep in the USA and waking up in the Republic(an) land of Trumpville. Oh my god! Suicide is now an option!
6
She’s lying.
Sorry, but to suddenly accuse a man after 35 years when you had over three decades to make your claim proves your lying.
If these lies work, the next candidate will be accused of sexually assaulting someone in grade school.
We understand it’s open warfare against white males - including those of us who are Democrats - but these ludicrous politically based smears must stop.
2
the ghost of jefferson who insisted that "an informed electorate" was necessary to protect and preserve government "by the people," must be in tears at the spectacle of the ignorance
and that has crippled our national debate and the partisanship that eroded both the integrity of, and our trust in, the constitutionally
established institutions that form the foundation of our democracy.
meanwhile, the ghost of lenin is dancing, the same erosion of trust spells success for his plan to subvert democracy, an effort that began with the birth of the soviet union and has proceeded with agents both planted and transient, moles within walls and organizers in the streets (wads of cash at the ready) and, as he said, "useful idiots," home grown, who can be drawn into abetting the subversive effort by temptation, appeals to self-interest.
sure, "better" would be better, but, back to jefferson, what we've got is there because we put it there, we have, as he said, "the government we deserve."
so stow the red MAGA hats and the rhetoric of "resistance" and let's have hats and slogans that say "IT'S ON US!,"
What a pity! the whole credibility of the judicial confirmation and the US Supreme Court has come to rest on a single testimony of a sexually assaulted victim of a person desperate to be a SC judge with all the stigma; and the Republican Senators would still like to confirm him with or without the Christine Blassey Ford's testimony.
3
@Prof. Jai Prakash Sharma: This whole disgraceful charade is a dance around the real issue: the clear and present danger to separation of church and state posed by religious fanatics striving to nullify the Constitutional base it stands upon: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", which legal scholars call the "Establishment Clause". The "Free Exercise" clause is also slated for misinterpretation, the Congress can indeed enact laws to prohibit coerced participation in religion.
3
The big question...will Mark Judge "flip" under pressure as more evidence comes out?
3
The time to have reported and investigated this was when it happened. Seems rather suspicious now. Did she tell her parents? Did they go to the police?
1
Add on, since this broke, Kavanaugh has been spending countless hours AT THE WHITEHOUSE. He has been in huddles with McGahn and practice sessions with, I can’t imagine why, Sarah Sanders and Bill Shine? Also there are now pro-Kavanaugh TELEVISION commercials. There is now no question this judge has been throughly corrupted by this administration. If his impartiality was ever in doubt before, that doubt has thoroughly and completely been removed. He ought to withdraw. Let Sarah and Shine blame the democrats. I really don’t care. What reputation? This administration isn’t even giving the guy the veneer of probity.
13
The Judiciary is the ultimate control of the Executive and the Legislature. To leave its appointment in the hands of those it is supposed to control inevitably will lead to the distortion and corruption of procedures witnessed now. It happens in every country that copied the American constitution in that respect.
2
@GG2018: What other country has a Senate as grossly malapportioned as this doddering collection of fools hand-picked by states to avoid adult supervision by Washington?
3
Well, no one can say the Editorial Board doesn't have a pretty wry sense of humor.
"Everyone Deserves Better Than This Senate Spectacle"
And, who, exactly, made a simple inquiry from a senator, into a spectacle ?
A media frenzy.
Clickbait.
Today there are eleven editorials and op-eds on this topic.
The Editorial Board, has no shame, that's for certain.
Yes, everyone does deserve better.
But they won't get it from the press.
6
Isn’t it a bit ironic that at the same time evangelicals are demanding he be confirmed that Dr Blasey is receiving death threats? Invites the question of who is truly Christian in this scenario.
20
"I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close.”
Really!
Really?
I used to admire Senator Graham.
17
Perhaps the issue isn't if the attack happened. Perhaps the issue is, this man seems to have had a high school best friend who was a falling-down, can't remember last night, drunk.
And his more recent history (the baseball tickets, etc.) bring his current friendships into question. This is someone who could be easily blackmailed.
Oh, and lest we forget, he was nominated by someone who is an admitted sexual predator and is quite possibly being blackmailed himself. By Putin.
23
If it looks like a cheap power grab and quacks like a cheap power grab ... it's a cheap power grab. We've been warned again and again about this country descending into an unrecognizable dictatorship. That will happen, not as a single dramatic event, but as little acts chipping away at our constitutional law.
20
It is perfectly reasonable to claim that we "deserve better",
but given how this society, in particular, its political class,
has behaved since 2016, one can only conclude
that this is exactly what we deserve, and that it is illusory to believe otherwise.
Millions of people voted for and continue to rally around a lying ignorant boor. They do so in order to keep those they detest for religious or ethnic reasons in their place or on the defensive. Streams of paranoia, xenophobia, and racism have broken out of their quarantined crevices of this society and emerged to be stumbled upon anywhere.
People feel completely free to express vile emotions and thoughts completely disconnected from reality. Lies are facts, fiction is evidence, what one's gut says is the obvious truth. Who needs anything more? As long as one feels "free"
in the process.
Media provide unending streams of silly spectacle or spectacular displays of social interactions gone wild. There are mass shootings daily, often more than one.
Arguments escalate without limit and violence ensues.
In such a social nervous breakdown, it is entirely consistent for the political realm to exhibit the same syndromes. What real
difference is there between the current display of partisan
pathologies and that in 2009-2016? The only one, albeit
a biggly one, I can see is that the unrestrained chaos
and bizarre venting is on display 24/7 at the WH,
and now serves as a national paradigm to emulate.
5
There are more questions about Brett Kavanaugh than the recent sexual harassment charges. His credibility is in doubt on other issues.
But his confirmation to the Court will not initiate questions of the Court's legitimacy. Bush v. Gore started down this most recent path and the Chief Justice's peculiar silence during the Merrick Garland putsch leads me to believe he was derelict in his duty to defend Article III.
We can afford to select any of the thousands of people qualified to sit on the Supreme Court without having to blink or compromise. These proceedings show the world that this is the best we have.
But is it?
4
Yet another example of how republicans have become enemies our democracy.
18
Kavanaugh is, and always has been, a tool. You can't print the words I would use to describe Grassley and Graham. Ford holds the cards; she has the right to file a civil complaint or press criminal charges against Kavanaugh in Maryland. And he knows it.
13
Kavanaugh knows all about statutes of limitation. He can't be criminally charged for this assault.
@J Marie
Question:
Is a rape accusation not to be investigated ex-officiously in Maryland,so that is it is not necessary to press charges once the accusation is knowwn?
There seems to be no statute of limitations.
When have the republicans cared at all about anything except short term having power and personal enrichment?? If they break the country and destroy the economy, that's fine. If we, the electorate, aren't careful we'll find ourselves under chinese rule, and at this point I brgin to think we would be better off.
5
If this were happening in a third- world country, how superior we would all feel as Americans who have a strong Constitution and live by it.
How low we've stooped in pursuit of "making American great again."
13
I am concerned by the short-term perspective of the majority of politicians over the past years, also reflected in the majority of replies on the Kavanaugh situation. All focus is on the immediate goal (approving or blocking Kavanaugh), with absolutely no consideration of the principles involved or of the longer term.
This attitude is what caused a frustrated Harry Reid to take the shortsighted knee-jerk reaction of eliminating the time-honored filibuster (though not for SCOTUS appointments). (Did he really never anticipate that the Republicans might one day be in the majority?) It later caused an outraged McConnell to (also shortsightedly) retaliate (e.g. refusal to consider Garland, eliminating filibuster for SCOTUS votes too). Does anybody believe we are better as a nation for those actions?!
Hypothetical: It is 10 years from now and Obama is nominated as Chief Justice. Would you support rejecting him, even if totally innocent, based upon a single isolated unsubstantiated he-said she-said claim from 1970?
The reality is that in our politically polarized world there will always be someone whose actual connection to the nominee may be as flimsy as being in the same City at some same time, but who is perfectly willing to make a false claim if that means blocking a nominee that they find ideologically undesirable.
Anita Hill yesterday".. lifetime privilege of serving on the country’s highest court, he has the burden of persuasion. And that is only fair."
Is it really?
6
@JR The filibuster came about in the first place because the apportionment of the US Senate is the most grotesque travesty of democracy on Earth. At least it afforded all senators with equal veto power.
1
Make America Great Again? How's that working out for you, Republicans?
Muscling through an unpopular Supreme Court justice nominee after blocking a distinguished nominee of Pres. Obama's, one whom the same Republican senators had earlier praised, is not great. Saying that boys will be boys, that something that a heavily drinking 17-year-old and buddy that caused great harm to a vulnerable 15-year-old girl doesn't matter now when a Supreme Court justice appointment is at stake. It's a mere hiccup involving a "mixed up" woman.
In March 2016 after Judge Garland was nominated, a CNN/ORC poll showed that 52% of Americans supported his confirmation, and 33% were opposed.
Today the WSJ/NBC poll shows that 34% of voters support Kavanaugh, and 38% oppose it.
When Sen. McConnell blocked the Garland nomination, he said, " Let's let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be."
So compare the two polls. 52% Garland vs. 34% Kavanaugh.
Exactly which American people get to decide this? Octogenarians who also opposed Anita Hill? The bias is striking. No FBI investigation, no other witnesses called, white Republican men lined up to attack a single woman and survivor of sexual assault as a 15-year-old, while Kavanaugh for a third day in a row spends the day at Trump's White House getting groomed.
The Blue Wave is turning into a tsunami.
35
What has become crystal clear is that some senators on the Judiciary Committee are well past their sell-by dates. I can't be the only outraged citizen who wanted to tell Chuck Grassley when he kept tap-tap-tapping to drown out Cory Booker what he could do with his gavel.
20
@Mike T Grassley and Booker much like 2 homeless guys fighting in the subway.
Grassley is 85 years old. He has no concept of being a teenage girl or boy in the mid-1980s. The best point in this editorial is the fact that Grassley is pushing forward much less of an inquiry than what he had the benefit of with the Clarence Thomas hearings. Shame on him - truth is not the primary goal.
23
I was gifted for so many years teaching at a university with so many bright young women and men---but I must have been teaching in a bubble when I look at our Congress just filled with questionable intellects and questionable moral compasses. How do the Grassley's rise to these positions of power? Sorry, forgot for a moment the intellect of our commander and chief.
21
My only real question for Mr. Grassley et al is this: Since the Republicans demonstrate such complete contempt for Procedure, for the Rule of Law and for Governance, why even bother with all the hard, hard work of packing the courts? I can only conclude that they are all possessed by some immeasurable fealty to veneer.
10
I'd rather see a 4-4 Supreme Court than this charade and degradation of our democracy. If the SCOTUS justices cannot come to a majority decision with an evenly divided court, that means that there is an inability to correctly determine the constitutionality of a case. If there is such an inability, the Supreme Court should not rule on the case. Another good suggestion made in past comments was terms limits. The purpose of lifetime appointments was so justices couldn't be influenced by fear of losing their position when making a determination. Staggered limited terms of nine years (or even a few more) would allow judges to rule without fear of losing their jobs, especially if they are not elected, but appointed by the president with the consent of Congress. Yes, the American people deserve better than this farce and they deserve better than the farce of the electoral college that elects a president with a minority of votes. . Times have changed and through amendments, so must our Constitution.
34
The right thing to do: Investigate the Ford sexual assault allegations fully. The investigation ends with Brett Kavanaugh either in or out. It is no longer just a political decision, it is a character decision, too. It should never have been just a political decision but that is what it was until this week. This whole mess matters because judges are supposed to be the best of the best character. Sexual assault is not good stuff to have lingering around on your character resume. It is important to find out if that stays on his resume or comes off his resume. You don't have to care, but how this turns out is going to eventually impact this American life in some way. Our elected U.S. senators are staring at a fork in the road. They need to take the road marked Do The Right Thing. It is really disgusting the Senate majority believes taking Do The Right Thing road is even up for debate.
28
@Steve The only character Kavanaugh exhibited during his public examination was a smug and smarmy evasiveness. This specimen has got to be one of the worst wasters of litigant's time and money in the judiciary.
Along with the sexual assault that did take place in that bedroom at that party, I am curious about a duplicitous dynamic here:
Who decided to throw an alcohol-fueled party for a bunch of teens in the first place? Whose parents sponsored this drunk fest? These were high school teenagers who got drunk, REALLY drunk. And one boy is accused of sexually assaulting a younger girl, Christine Blasey, possible with the help of another boy. According to the victim, she was cornered into a bedroom and overpowered with a hand over her mouth so she couldn't scream for help.
Is it common among elite parents to sponsor a party for teens and provide the alcohol? There names need to be made public in the course of the investigation and testimony.
15
@David Ohman My thoughts too. The elite schools bear some responsibility for that underage drinking too, whether on or off campus.
6
@David Ohman, heh. Elite parents are very seldom home--or they are at their other houses. Throwing parties without adults is often a rich kid right-of-passage.
5
@abigail49. So you were both there?
Investigation or not, this clearly is going to end up in a he-said she-said. So, what is to be done in such a standstill?
Anita Hill argued “"...as Judge Kavanaugh stands to gain the lifetime privilege of serving on the country’s highest court, he has the burden of persuasion. And that is only fair." In plain English, his nomination should be rejected, unless he can PROVE that he is innocent! This is a ridiculously unattainable standard in any "he-said she-said" allegation but particularly one that is 35 years old! There simply is no possibility of having evidence to prove a negative! There can be no photo, recording, witness or DNA of him NOT doing the alleged attack. It’s an impossible demand.
People will suggest that Ford mentioning her allegation to others at some point in the past is proof what she is saying is true. But would they accept that the absence of Kavanaugh ever mentioning such an incident to anybody over the past 30+ years similarly proves that his denial is true? Of course not, nor should they.
Bottom line: “Are we really prepared to allow any nominee, even if totally innocent, to be blocked from the court based upon a single isolated unsubstantiated claim?” In our politically polarized world there will always be someone whose connection to the nominee may be a flimsy as being in the same City at the same time (as with Ford), but who is perfectly willing to make a false claim if that means blocking a nominee that they find ideologically undesirable.
6
@JR Yes. We don't owe Kavanaugh anything. We owe it to ourselves and our children to have a SC that is above reproach and capable of impartiality. Kavanaugh is neither. There is no injustice--we can just choose not to hire him to avoid the whiff of impropriety.
15
Investigation or not, this clearly is going to end up in a he-said she-said. So, what is to be done in such a standstill?
Anita Hill argued “"...as Judge Kavanaugh stands to gain the lifetime privilege of serving on the country’s highest court, he has the burden of persuasion. And that is only fair." In plain English, his nomination should be rejected, unless he can PROVE that he is innocent! This is a ridiculously unattainable standard in any "he-said she-said" allegation but particularly one that is 35 years old! There simply is no possibility of having evidence to prove a negative! There can be no photo, recording, witness or DNA of him NOT doing the alleged attack. It’s an impossible demand.
People will suggest that Ford mentioning her allegation to others at some point in the past is proof what she is saying is true. But would they accept that the absence of Kavanaugh ever mentioning such an incident to anybody over the past 30+ years similarly proves that his denial is true? Of course not, nor should they.
Bottom line: “Are we really prepared to allow any nominee, even if totally innocent, to be blocked from the court based upon a single isolated unsubstantiated claim?” In our politically polarized world there will always be someone whose connection to the nominee may be as flimsy as being in the same City at the same time (as with Ford), but who is perfectly willing to make a false claim if that means blocking a nominee that they find ideologically undesirable.
3
Anita Hill offers a glimpse at the bright future she’s long worked toward. “We really have been building on an understanding of what equality means, whether we fight to gender equality or racial equality or equal rights based on sexual identity,” said Anita Hill.
That optimism has been replaced by deja vu.
Hill accused Thomas of sexual harassment, while Blasey’s stem from sexual assault at a high school party - similarities hard to ignore.
Each sent a letter detailing her experience, to be kept confidential. It wasn’t, and soon, Hill was called to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in what many people saw as Hill herself being put on trial.
She was trying to share an experience she thought pertinent to a Supreme Court appointment; an unsettling glimpse into what Blasey herself may expect, if she takes the stand next week.
Both women took - and “passed” - polygraph tests, both women expected others to come forward with their own stories of harassment or assault, both women spawned “I believe” movements from supporters and attempts to discredit them at every turn.
Both Hill and Blasey have been blasted for not coming forward with their claims earlier. Considering how they have been treated when they did finally come forward - to threats against the lives of their children - their reticence may be the only understandable part of a history hellbent on repeating itself.
28
Along with the sexual assault that did take place in that bedroom at that party, I am curious about a duplicitous dynamic here:
Who decided to throw an alcohol-fueled party in the first place? Whose parents sponsored this drunk fest? These were high school teenagers who got drunk, REALLY drunk. And two boys, possibly Brett Kavanaugh and his friend, sexually assaulted a young girl, Christine Blasey, by cornering her into a bedroom and overpowering her with a hand over her mouth so she couldn't scream for help.
Is it common among elite parents to sponsor a party for teens and provide the alcohol?
I hope there will be at least a civil law suit filed against the adults who allowed this to happen.
4
@David Ohman
You're kidding, right? I suspect the parents were not home, kids raided liquor cabinets or got an older sibling to buy for them, and they convened without parental consent. Teenage kids used to do this and they probably still do. Teens may lie about where they are going-shock! They did it in the 80's and I know some kids still do. I'm not condoning it, just saying. Do you also want to investigate all the parents of these now adult children who attended this party and make sure the parents, if still living, knew the kids were going to this quite probably non supervised party 30 years ago? And then sue them? I mean, you're kidding, right? If you are not kidding, the tyranny of the far left is much worse than that of the right.
2
In the rush to push Kavanaugh through to the U.S. Supreme Court, we are witnessing an indelible stain on American Democracy.
34
@rbjd: US Senate apportionment resembles only the Rotten Boroughs of Old England. It utterly belies "one person, one vote".
For me, there are two questions in play here.
First and foremost is whether Judge Kavanaugh did in fact assault as a teen another teenager? If you can answer that question, then the other question is easy.
What type of person, son or daughter, father or mother, human being!, would do this? Sorry, but the "I was drunk and in a fratty mood" doesn't cut it. My children wouldn't have acted like that! My brother or I would not have acted like that. My father and his brother would not have acted like that. All of us regardless of our state of intoxication.
And likely, the only witness to this as per Ms. Blasey, Mr. Judge, most likely would not have acted like that. Luckily for him, he will be spared the public humiliation of having witnessed an assault while knowing he is safe enough to say that due to his intoxication, he can't possibly remember the event.
But at this time, there is enough denial from Kavanaugh that can be sifted through by relatively easily to corroborate investigation. Was there a party? When was the party? Where was the party? Did the two kids in question know each other? Was Kavanaugh known to be a person that attend such parties?
And most important, are there other women who where accosted by him who have not yet found the courage to come forward (not that this would matter if even in his entire life, this were a one time assault)?
Judge Kavanaugh must ultimately decide how this will unfold. And if he was there and then, save his daughters disgrace.
7
STOP! We are talking about a nominee for the Supreme Court.......a life-time term. That person should be as spotless as possible, regardless of their political views (which, under ideal circumstances, should be non-partisan). Kavanaugh has already raised warning flags about his ability to tell the truth before this latest incident. He has perjured himself in previous testimony and that, alone, should be grounds for criminal charges sufficient to remove from the bench he presently occupies. He should withdraw or failing that, be subjected to a more complete FBI investigation which includes all witnesses available.
24
The FBI needs to continue the background check to confirm the accusation. Denying an investigation is an insult to American people, and to women everywhere. Wake up Senate Judiciary and do the right thing.
24
DJT will not allow the FBI to reopen a background check on Judge Kavanaugh, the logically question is why?
3
You will never ever get equally protective laws and judgments out of politicians and judges who hold themselves exempt from the laws they make for others.
13
Some observations about Judge Kavanaugh that I made when watching the earlier hearings: He was evasive while "answering" the hard questions. Answers to "yes or no" questions were a long list of case law, other extraneous information and never, never did they get a simple yes or no.
What we have learned is that Judge Kavanaugh most likely - this is from writings and other statements - will not support health care for Preexisting Conditions. Next.
the problem of EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. He has written in respected law journals that he believes a President should not be investigated while in office - he has so many other things to deal with. Currently that seems to be gold and campaign rallies.
When asked who can exert executive privilege, he even hedged on that - he somehow included judicial review.
Of course, there's more. For the entirety you can always stream the hearings on C-Span 2 and come to your own conclusions.
The statements from committee members tell a lot about Judge Kavanaugh, but he shares remarkably little about himself.
And then there is that unfortunate year book page.
In all, I would be more inclined to believe him if it weren't for all the weaseling I watched him do.
He should admit his past follies, such as the drunken parties his contemporaries attest to, and accept whatever results come. If he is not confirmed, so be it.
30
@Elizabeth
Just to clarify - I have mis-typed Golf twice now in comments - it comes out GOLD. Perhaps it's a Freudian slip for GOLD BRICKING, which is, after all, the general idea.
The Supreme Court is more than an investigatory stop by police done on reasonable suspicion. Ms. Shaw's suggestion that mere "credible allegations" are enough is no more reasonable than the stop and frisk laws used to abuse minority citizens.
This came up too little and too late, maybe by design, maybe not, but the result is the same.
Therefore, we must either just adopt a lower standard, as suggested by Ms. Shaw's column, or adopt Mr. Krotoszynski's suggestion to further investigate if warranted, and then remove him by impeachment if that shows cause.
Yes, we all deserve better than this binary choice, but the Senate and our politics is broken more deeply and fundamentally than just this nomination process.
The last time, the only time, a Justice was impeached was part of the partisan ill feelings that nearly tore apart our early Constitution. We are there again.
We can take some comfort than Jefferson and Madison were the losers last time, but became reconciled to the compromise worked out and adopted by Chief Justice Marshall and his Court for Judicial Review of Constitutional questions, and more discrete behavior by Justices and judges pending such review.
I can only hope we can do again what Jefferson, Madison, and Marshall did before, because we are in dire straits today.
4
@Mark Thomason: When will they stop caving to laws respecting establishments of religion?
Republicans voted to change the rules regarding confirmation of SC nominees from 60 votes to a simple majority, including if necessary the VP. The Dems previously adopted the majority vote rule for lower court judgeships and, for better or worse, and now more than ever, we are now populating our federal judiciary with far too many marginally qualified judges who are too crudely partisan to act as true independent arbiters of the very issues that upon which the peaceful effectiveness and functioning of our government depends.
Thanks to a simple majority vote, we now face the prospect of confirming a man as new SC justice who not only embodies the plutocracy and bad faith that currently dominates this country but the selective morality that supports it so vigorously.
23
On August 30, 2017, Donald Trump called Senator Chuck
Grassley and assured him that he was still committed to ethanol, a very important issue for corn-producing Iowa. I've noticed that ever since that call, Grassley has acted as Trump's toady. Now, Grassley is ditching precedent and traditional rules in an effort to railroad Trump's nominee through the senate confirmation process. It is almost as if Grassley agreed to a tacit quid pro quo with the president over ethanol. You can draw your own conclusions but in 1991, Grassley welcomed the FBI's intervention in the Anita Hill case. Now, he says it is inappropriate.
25
Investigation or not, this clearly is going to end up in a he-said she-said. So, what is to be done then?
Anita Hill argued “"...as Judge Kavanaugh stands to gain the lifetime privilege of serving on the country’s highest court, he has the burden of persuasion. And that is only fair." Translation: His nomination should be rejected, unless he can PROVE that he is innocent! This is a ridiculously unattainable standard in any "he-said she-said" allegation but particularly one that is 35 years old! There simply is no possibility of having evidence to prove a negative! There can be no photo, recording, witness or DNA of him NOT doing the alleged attack. It’s an impossible demand.
People will suggest that Ford mentioning her allegation to others at some point in the past is "proof" what she is saying is true. But would they accept that the absence of Kavanaugh ever mentioning such an incident to anybody over the past 30+ years similarly proves that his denial is true? Of course not, nor should they.
Bottom line: “Are we really prepared to allow this or any future nominee, even if totally innocent, to be blocked from the court based upon a single isolated unsubstantiated claim?” In our politically polarized world there will always be someone whose connection to the nominee may be as flimsy as being in the same City at the same time (as with Ford), but who is perfectly willing to make a false claim if that means blocking a nominee that they find ideologically undesirable.
5
@JR There are plenty of qualified conservative judges. I'm sure most of them don't have this type of skeleton in their closet. It's not a trial - we are picking a lifetime Supreme Court justice and should have a very high standard.
5
@JR What if it becomes a 'substantiated' claim?
@Matthew S
Exactly.
WHY does it HAVE to be Kavanaugh..!!!
Why not Merrick Garland..???
But anyway, it is obvious to me, even here in Sydney, that Kavanaugh will be confirmed.
It is clearly what Putin & Murdoch want and
Trump & the Republicans are just "following orders".
And so now we will be able to watch the 'Kangaroo' Supreme Court ...... appointed by the 'russianized' Senate Hearings ...... for the next 30 or more years.
Good luck America..!!!
Trump doesn't seem too concerned that Kavanaugh is a financial and moral mess who has probably hit a dead end in his hoped-for career path.
And Trump wants a new AG.
They're perfect for each other.
13
As I understand it, Judge Kavanaugh was 17 at the time of this incident and drunk. The legal drinking age in Maryland at the time was 21. Does this blatant disregard for the law indicate that he might not be the right person to sit on the highest court in the land?
41
*Why* do *we* deserve better? *We* elected Feinstein, and McConnell, and Trump.
Maybe you and didn't individually vote for any of them, but apathy and low voter turn-out and gerrymandering and every other political evil that we have long tolerated most certainly did. Until 'we the people' reform the system, we get what we deserve.
5
If only the GOP / Party of Trump had nominated a woman. If only. Not quite as smart as they think they are.
6
For many years, I could not understand how Senator Joe McCarthy could persuade many Americans that his opponents were all Communists.I understand now. We have a single unverified account of sexual misconduct decades ago against a man who has led an irreproachable life since then. We are told by delusional progressives that the accusation must be true simply because they want it to be. Any voice of reason questioning this account is met with a stream of hatred and denunciation and lack of understanding that disagreements can be made in good faith. The greatest haters in this country are not mainstream Republicans but progressives.
5
@Alex No, Kavanaugh has NOT led an "irreproachable life since then." He has twice LIED UNDER OATH during Senate confirmation hearings. The conduct has landed others in prison for practicing fraud. So let's get our fact straight.
25
Irreproachable life? Judge Kavanaugh has been lying about the stolen emails that he had received. There are many unanswered questions regarding his finances. He wouldn’t answer straightforward questions during his hearing, one being would he recuse himself from a case that involved the president and the Russia investigation. Very bizarrely, he thanked Trump for the nomination by saying, “No president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination.” Judge Kavanaugh is a political animal and has no place on a fair and balanced Supreme Court.
20
@Alex No, you have Democrats who are asking for a fair investigation. How is that biased toward Dr. Blasey? It would be an investigation of her claims, too. And, by the way, it's not 'sexual misconduct', as you wrote. The word the accuser is using is sexual assault. Please don't soften her claim when you have no idea what she might have experienced. That is dismissive, which makes your word choice part of the larger problem.
8
So another day goes by with the Republican controlled senate judiciary committee continuing to try and force Dr. Blasey to accept their terms and testify on Monday with little preparation time, no FBI investigation, and no witnesses (especially the only other person in the room Mr. Judge) being called to testify.
I have said this over and over again...this pathetic nomination train is leaving the station. The senate republicans and their salivating enablers are not going to let a little thing like Ideals, Justice, Honor, and Truth get in the way.
The time is rapidly approaching for a public and enduring outcry for justice. Whether in a Court of Law (in trumps case) or at the Ballot Box in the senate's case.
20
As per NYT 9-18-18, Kavanaugh said: “What happens at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep.” (Includes link to live video of him saying it.) K also jokes repeatedly about binge drinking. All of this lends plausibility to Dr. Ford's accusations.
And let's not forget the huge mysterious credit card debts (for baseball tickets? seriously?). And all the missing documents. And his known views on presidential immunity from prosecution.
At this point, Kavanaugh is a more flawed nominee than even Clarence Thomas. In the old days (prior to 1990), this would have been the end of the story. I can only hope a few Republicans can somehow recover their sense of decency.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/18/us/Kavanaugh-binge-drinking-Yale-spee...
21
Please elaborate, why is Ford's allegation against Kavanaugh credible? Any evidences at all?
5
@Leopold Kavanaugh should be demanding an investigation to clear his name.
2
A wonderful editorial. Too bad it falls on deaf, partisan ears.
6
She is a very brave woman.
20
This is good old boy behavior at its worst. To show no understanding of how a young woman would not come forward when this terrible event happened is typical. As a woman who was attacked while walking on a beach at night, I can tell you, you just want to run and hide and pretend it never happened. Things like this have happened to millions of women - but their attackers don't go on to be nominated for the Supreme Court. And now to berate her courageous decision to do the right thing despite what it will do to her life forever is disgusting. I am a female Republican, but I haven't voted for a Republican for a long time and I may never vote for one again. If they could take back women's right to vote they would do it in a heart beat.
31
@Teddi Teddi, what you describe is a terrible event but I'm sure that you know where it happened and when it happened. Ms.Ford does not which is an awful problem with her accusation.
"President Barack Obama’s first pick for the court, about positions taken 30 years earlier by a legal-defense fund whose board she had once sat on."
Adult and a lawyer sitting on an advisory board versus a teenager at a random high school party 36 years in the past are one and the same--time is time?
2
Lets look at this in perspective. Is Judge Kavanaugh to be denied a seat on the Supreme Court for an alleged mistake he made as a Minor in High School almost 40 years ago?
Have none of us made misteaks in High School?
What would have been his punishment had Ms Ford reported this at the time? A slap on his wrist? After all, there was NO Rape involved here. Is there no statute of limitations in the USA? Where has Ms Ford been the past 40 years?
This appears to be just another case of Partisan Politicas at it's
Worst.
5
@BobK are you seriously using the words "partisan politics" to describe the accusations made by Dr. Ford? Of course, there was no partisan politics involved when Mitch McConnell refused hearings on Merrick Garland, correct?
If you are so sure that Dr. Ford's accusations have no merit, then let events take their proper course, A background investigation by the FBI, testimony afterwards by all parties involved with corroborating witnesses. What are Republicans so afraid of, as they push this nomination forward? And as for denying Kavannaugh a seat on the Supreme Court, the fact that he still views women's rights as not settled law, that his position on Presidential power is deeply concerning...so much-and none of it has anything to do with Dr. Ford.
14
@BobK Assault gets more than a slap on the wrist. Assault shows lack of moral judgement.
10
I'm not the most perspicuous guy on the block but it seems to me that 'ol Bart is going to beat the rap. What amazes me is the they got 65 women to say exactly the same sentence applauding the Bartman. I am 71 years old and I can't think of even one woman that I've known, much less sixty five to praise and adore me as though I were a God, even though I worked as a saintly casino boss in the 70's. Truth be told, I said a lot of things to a lot of women that were completely out of line. But to attempt rape of a woman, never, ever and if any of us even heard of such a character in our midst, I can guarantee that stuff would happen.
That being said, prepare for a long terrifying night mare.
15
Lets see,.............Is Judge Kavanaugh to be denied a seat on the Supeme Court for a mistake he made, almost 40 years ago as a Minor in High School? And where has Ms Ford been hiding for the past 40 years when she had numerous opportunities to report her grievance? Had Kavanaugh been taken to court 40 years ago for this issue, what would have been the outcome? Probably a slap on the wrist. There was NO Rape involved here, simply a serious mistake by an immature High School boy.
On the surface, this appears to be another case of Partisan Politics at it's Worst.
7
Grassley is mirroring Mitch McConnell's dictatorial behavior during the Merrick Garland non-hearing for over a year, fiasco. Grassley refuses to veer from his sole purpose of ramming through another conservative, corporate, right wing Catholic justice, who does not represent a large percentage of the US population.
The GOP is forcing their puritanical, patriotic ideology on everyone for decades. Forgive us if we don't take that GOP boot heal on our necks "graciously", as Southern Baptists like to say.
Kavanaugh has been seen lying under oath several times and refusing to answer substantive questions. He hiding the 6 years of records from his Bush II White House service.
Nothing to see there, move along and confirm Kavanaugh.Trust us, we know what is best for you.
We'll have to see what happens over the next 30 years in the Corporate States of America. Don't worry about it.
14
@cjonsson: The only law that prescribes separation of church and state in the US is the one the whole Federalist Society is organized to defy: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion", the so-called "Establishment Clause".
2
I find it interesting that Mark Judge says he was not at the party and that Kavanaugh would never do what he was accused of, but fully remembers and has written extensively about the culture of Georgetown Prep, in great detail. The Republicans will not allow any other witnesses, and will not allow him to be subpoenaed. When Anita Hill testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, not only did George Bush ask the FBI to investigate before the hearings took place (investigation took three days) but many witnesses were called to testify. Therefore, the hearings, as set up by Senator Grassely, are less thorough than during the Anita Hill hearings on the allegations of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas. Grassley was on the committee then. If this goes through without an FBI investigation, and no other witnesses, Democrats should indeed threaten to begin impeachment hearings, not only for Trump, but for Kavanaugh, if they take back the House and/or Senate. They should threaten it now, so that if Kavanaugh is confirmed, there is the clear threat, that he will undergo impeachment proceedings. This is not only because of Professor Ford's allegations, but also for lying under oath on numerous occasions, and additionally, the Democrats did not receive relevant documents for his confirmation. They were withheld.
18
Why isn’t Brett Kavanaugh asking for an investigation so he can clear his name?
21
Please give it up for the good of the country, Bart!
14
Recalling Clarence Thomas' confirmation hearing, can be quite instructive and should be concerning to women and men who believe in equality. Anita Hill's accusations against Clarence Thomas, painted a picture of socially dysfunctional person--his selective harassment of a fellow African American in the workplace, his disdain for affirmative action that helped him get into Yale Law School, and his almost pathological tendency to be against anything that might benefit blacks,minorities or women--who hated the fact that he was born black. His record on the court has reflected these views since he has been on the court.
Judge Kavanaugh has been evasive about his positions on women just like Thomas was on his possible votes on affirmative action and abortion rights. Like Thomas, Kavanaugh has an incident in his past that shows you his lack of character and misogny. His record on women's issues is appalling and anybody naive enough to believe he won't try to overturn Roe v. Wade is a fool. Clarence Thomas ultimately was confirmed after some African Americans and democrats rallied to his defense against the"high tech lynching " Thomas claimed he was suffering. Don't be fooled Kavanaugh will lead the way against women's rights. affirmative action, legalizing torture and everything else the far right wants to accomplish. If you think he will weight the issues and give thoughtful
12
The hearings on Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas were my political awakening. Then as now I can't fathom why there is any question that someone with such accusations against him from a reputable source should not be confirmed to a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. It is straightforward: if there is any doubt that the man is not fit, he should not be confirmed. This should have nothing to do with politics; it is an issue of human decency and respect for women.
17
@Iam 2
Completely agree..!!
And WHY does it HAVE to be Kavanaugh..!!!
There are DOZENS, if not hundreds, of other BETTER Judges available who would not have so many disqualifying problems.
Why not Merrick Garland..???
Or why not a woman..???
( Last time I checked women ARE 51% of the population..!! )
BTW I am a 61 yr male who has done a LOT of work in my life with survivors of domestic violence, and children who have been sexually abused by family members.
And also a lot of work with people suffering PTSD.
I have already seen enough 'evidence' ...........
DO I BELIEVE THE LADY..??? Completely..!!!
And the courage of this woman to come out like this, knowing what would happen ..... HUMBLES me..!!!
( It has even been WORSE than anyone could imagine!! )
Senators Grassley and Feinstein are both in their mid-80's. As evidenced by the soap opera they have allowed to play out on capital hill, they are probably too old to serve in the Senate in an effective way. Shouldn't we consider a mandatory retirement age for our Senators?
7
"I'll listen to the lady" says all you need to hear about how much GOP leadership respects women.
27
The Democrats' response to allegations that Bill Clinton raped and sexually harassed women is the gold standard that should be applied by Democrats today. Plus, we should apply the Democrats' longstanding positions that minors should not be tried in adult courts, and that minors' records of events that occurred when they were minors should be sealed. The Times' double standard in these areas is appalling.
6
Grassley is on video praising the FBI investigation of Anita Hill’s allegations as right and just. His shameless hipocracy is on full view for all to see. How far (backward) we have come in 35+ years. VOTE!
15
Perhaps the NYT can start investigative research into The Rape Club - a club that protects men who get into trouble with women. I would even bet there's a hefty buy-in to join the club. A good place to start would be a couple of websites dedicated to hating women. Scary stuff there.
2
It is clear to me that Kavanugh is desperate to get approved. In his nomination acceptance speech he even read what White House preperad for him.
He needs to pass lie detector and FBI investigation before this circus continues.
8
Charges at the last minute sully the Democrats claim. What ought to count is whether the candidate has been a highly competent Judge. Democrats have other interests.
9
Republicans want to keep this examination of Kavanaugh at the lowest bar possible. Their main and perhaps only goal is to seat Kavanaugh, a conservative, before the midterm elections when they may lose control of the Senate and the House. That does not suit their agenda.
Ms. Feinstein was between a rock and a hard place. She had information but was asked to keep it in confidence.
Given that Dr. Blasey's life has been threatened since she has come forward, it is understandable that she preferred to keep her identity confidential.
Now the FBI must do its job. Contrary to Mr. Trump's statement, the FBI does not get to choose its cases. It is tasked with background investigations of federal employees, including those who are appointed.
Instead, it is Mr. Trump who does not want an investigation, which might derail this appointment. Republicans play by a set of rules that they do not want their Democratic opponents to have--delay, denial and obfuscation. Democrats, on the other hand, must be allowed to use all parliamentary procedures still allowed.
Most importantly, Republicans removed the super-majority for important appointments like SCOTUS. And they still barely have the votes they need to confirm Kavanaugh.
9
Not that much you can investigate 35 years later. I suppose the FBI can interview the 2 of them and the other guy supposed to be there. Even if they find an inconsistency it could be just spotty memory. Basically comes down to he said she said.
7
It would be far more credible if Kavanaugh would say "I was a jerk in high school, my friends and I drank too much, partied too much, and often didn't treat girls right. I don't remember this specific event, but it could have happened. "
For those of who were in high school in the 70's and 80's, this explanation would be far more believable. These things happened (and still do), Dr. Blasey was very fortunate to get away with only mental trauma.
Many girls have not been so lucky.
I am much more concerned about the fact we know so little of Kavanaugh's activities as an adult, in Bush's Administration, his involvement with torture, constructing the war, covering up mistakes, absolving guilt, his experience/attitude of 'protecting' a president's bad decisions, his experience making the law optionally 'flexible', and the fact he was not "forthcoming" about so many very important issues at the hearings.
This does not minimize the trauma Dr. Blasey may have suffered, but it may minimize the trauma the rest of the country WILL suffer, if he is confirmed.
19
If Kavanaugh is confirmed half the country will believe that a morally compromised candidate was forced on them by a small legislative majority. If his candidacy is derailed, the other half will believe it was because partisan politicians exploited (or orchestrated) an uncorroborated and dubious allegation of teenage misbehavior. Either way, the prestige of the Supreme Court will take a big and permanent hit and the bitterness of our social divide will grow. This is not a happy nation.
25
Last night I was watching a recap of the Douglas Ginsburg nomination "scandal" in the 80s and grew wistful for a simpler time. Smoking cannabis was once a disqualifier for confirmation to the SCOTUS. Now, a potential attempted rape by a nominee not only goes uninvestigated, it's considered a mere hiccup in a process that will likely lead to a party-line vote to confirm someone credibly accused of sexual assault. How did we get here?
51
It went un-investigated for 35 years, because the alleged victim did not report it. Please stop talking about an “investigation” as if it happened recently, there are lot of details and names, which could be easily investigated, but the “dark forces” don’t want to.
1
@Gimme A. Break it doesn't matter when it happened...they are afraid to call the eyewitness...you know, the self-described black out king?
the alleged event took place while both were minors. if there is to be an investigation it should be conducted according to the rules and laws of a juvenile crime in the state in which it occurred. all the shouts for a federal FBI investigation were ludicrous and not in conformity with the law.
5
@bored critic In Maryland there is no statute of limitations on something like this, so there could very well be a criminal investigation and trial, over which congress and the president have no control.
4
If Dr. Ford wants to make an allegation that she claims is “the truth,” then she should have no trouble testifying before the Senate committee. That she is refusing to do so immediately brings her credibility into question. She sent her complaint to Dianne Feinstein in July, so to suddenly claim she is “too fragile” (as a 51 year old adult) to defend her claim is nonsense. If she’s grown up enough to destroy someone’s career with an allegation that has yet to be proven, she grown up enough to step forward and defend her claim. Everyone - including Republicans - is bending over backwards to accommodate her by providing her with multiple forums, public and private, to testify. If she refuses to do so she has no credibility as far as I’m concerned.
9
@XLER The republicans are gunning for her. If she testifies without the FBI investigating which is the proper thing to do, The Republican party will attack her. They do not care a bit about their boy being guilty of attempted rape on even murder. They only want him on the supreme court to serve their donors, To favor big business, and the ultra wealthy. Trump also wants him because he will get his own crimes covered up and hidden.
There is no open and fair hearing planned for this brave woman, only mudslinging and a fight to the death to have complete corruption of the Supreme Court. Who will always now favor the elite and never protect the workers.
But go ahead and trash this brave women and all women, because you will be encouraged to do so by the oligarchs who run this country, to your own detriment. You will be the poorer and the forgotten person in this incessant greed and attack on the little people.
First they come for the non whites and then for all women, they will get you someday too. We will all be sitting toast, except for the elites.
11
Clearly the FBI is not going to be involved, and given the mediocre job they have done so far, maybe that is good. There is nothing to prevent the Democratic minority from hiring an independent investigation, which can proceed right up to the election, to determine what is what. There must be a few witnesses to the party, and to the fact of the assault, since it was a theme in the Holton-Arms School after it occurred, according to one alumna.
5
Do not blame Diane Feinstein for this. Kevin de Leon will never get my vote or support as long as he keeps attacking Ms. Feinstein rather than the real enemies of process and democracy. Ms. Feinstein's hands were tied - it is not her right or ability to out a victim without their consent. Good to see another man thinking it's his right to tell a victim or a victim's advocate what they should do and should have done. Of course, hindsight always being 20/20. But - the attack on Ms. Feinstein is just another ploy for men to hold women to blame for their actions or personal advancement.
19
To add to the shameful facade the Republicans are trying to maintain for the judiciary committee hearing, is the fact that one of its members, Orin Hatch, has already stated he doesn't believe Dr. Ford. He has never met the woman; never talked to her, and yet he has stated on camera that he thinks she is "mixed up". Clearly there is no way, Dr. Ford will get an impartial hearing.
That said, this whole circus is simply about the Republican effort to overturn Roe v Wade. Are we to believe that out of all the brilliant jurists in this country there is none better than Bret Kavanaugh? Are we to believe that Bret Kavanaugh has been chosen because he will do the bidding of the Republican base? Pretty much.
But here's one thing the Republicans seem not to have considered seriously enough. According to multiple polls, between 62% and 67% of voters think women should have the right to make their own healthcare decisions. When Roe v Wade is overturned, the brakes on the bus the Republican Party is gleefully riding in, are going to lock up and the Republicans are going to go right through the windshield.
37
@Hal Gessner
Clearly, even beyond the Roe V. Wade issue, is that since Kavanaugh is, in reality, the choice of the ultra right wing corporate friendly, Federalist Society, regardless of any change in government that might happen in the near future, we will pretty much know the outcome of any decisions made by them and in whose favor and their pro-corporate, anti-social justice ideology will prevail going forward.
The last time this happened it started in the late 1800's only to be finally halted by FDR in the 1930's and the New Deal(which the SC opposed), ie. almost 40 yrs.! In between all this was a "Gilded Age" and probably the worst depression in America(and world's) history.
7
Actually, I was impressed by the hearings and Kavanaugh's responses to some pretty volatile senators. He did not 'sully' the proceedings. I don't think any candidate brought before the Senate would ever get the approval of the Dems these days. Likely the opposite is true too. But this man has been vetted, has spent over 70 days at this point. Not buying the political nonsense. Sotomayor was extremely liberal, and not one I would have chosen, but Obama did and she was put on the court. Everything has become so polarized, it's sad.
11
NO NO NO, I disagree with the title of this article! "EVERYONE" does NOT deserve better than this Senate spectacle and shall I explain why? Precisely because this Senate spectacle has been caused by EVERY SINGLE NEANDERTHAL VOTER that cast a ballot for those Senators that 1) refused to consider or even meet with the nominee of President Obama notwithstanding that he had nearly a FULL YEAR left to his term and 2) GOP Senators employed the "nuclear option" and destroyed the SAFEGUARD of needing 60 votes (consider it 60% of the population instead of a simple majority) to confirm SCOTUS nominees because the decisions they'll be making greatly affect our lives and only having a 50% agreement is not sufficient when considering that fully half the land are opposed and the other in agreement. Much healthier to have at least 60 Senators (or 60% support) for a decision so profound and 3) the way they've steamrolled this process is abysmal and while I think it UNFAIR to go back to anyone's unsubstantiated HIGH SCHOOL records to deny this nominee when his RECORD is fully reason enough, does not sit well for me. The bottom line is that those that CAUSED all this are not entitled to expect anything "better" and in fact I wish those who consider this current government positively....I wish them nothing but ill for they have inflicted on me and my fellow "moral and caring" co-citizens. I say NOT ONE THING better to them. A POX ON THEIR HOUSES, I say.
9
Trumps constance discrediting of the FBI has become very helpful now for the Republican who have failed to do their oversight and at the same time they've packed the courts and worked overtime to discredit to the fourth estate, the last barrier to our democracy. Vote or role over America.
3
But in a way it is nice. I almost feel as if “the old normal” has come back. There is nothing here that could not have happened ten years ago. In fact, if Jeb Bush were our President, this probably would be happening too.
This is average, normal, for American politics.
1
Excellent article on why an investigation into Dr. Blasey-Fords accusations should not be handled by the Senate Judiciary committee. http://fortune.com/2018/09/19/brett-kavanaugh-senate-sexual-misconduct/
Maryland has no statute of limitations on felony sex crimes and can launch an investigation in response to the victim’s report to the police, even 35 years after the fact. They take sexual assault much more seriously in Maryland than do the Republican good ol boys in the US Senate.
14
"Just as Mr. Judge has given inconsistent statements to the press"
Not so. Mr. Judge has said at different times that he has no memory of the incident, no recollection of it, and "It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way"
How are these statements in any way inconsistent? They each say the same thing - two in a formal way, and one in an informal way.
6
Sure, the Dems would prefer a delay and the GOP would prefer a rush. So if there's nothing being brought up, a rush could make sense. But there is something being brought up.
As for Mark Judge, does it take an old timer to see that substituting "Bart" for "Brett" does not make one a Maverick? That's enough smoke to merit an investigation into whether there was a fire.
5
Why is Grassley so easy going about the Ds plotting to disrupt the nomination - which was at least somewhat publicly admitted to by Sen. Durkin. and not denied by the others on the committee, the stream of protesters he says are exercising "free speech" (if so, why are they being removed - arrested?) and now a challenge to the nominee's morality in which the claimant won't even testify? He should just have a vote.
Ds and Rs do terrible things to each other. Many, probably good people originally, have become not so good people, not caring who they destroy. Often, those in the minority behave worse. Sens. Hirono, Blumenthal and Whitehouse, probably more than others, seem to have lost their sense of decency completely - I presume believing they are justified in the certainty that their side must be right and the others side filled with monsters. I can't imagine how they would behave questioning the justice about assault. Hirono basically already accused him of complicity with another judge's bad behavior b/c he once worked for him.
To partisans on either side, these congressional hearings are fine because they believe there is some larger purpose - and they must be right. But, they destroy the only process we have. I will give the Rs, who were abominable in their treatment of the Clintons in the '90s and whose Benghazi hearings were an embarrassment, and foolish in the way they treated Garland - they tend to behave better towards D nominees than vice versa.
2
The “mockery” were the Dems announcing their opposition within hours of the nomination, the unbelievably rude questioning by Democratic senators, particularly Harris and Booker (was there a question even buried in the self serving statement, senator), and now the drive by shooting by Blasey Ford, assisted by Feinstein, who sat on this since July. I am a Democrat, despise Trump, am pro choice and not wild about Kavanaugh, but have been embarrassed by the Democrats throughout this process. We could have gotten a far worse nominee from Trump.
7
@Elsie
It's difficult to imagine someone who claims "I am a Democrat, despise Trump, am pro choice and not wild about Kavanaugh" could possibly think the Dems are the ones acting shamefully. I will concede that Feinstein probably dropped the ball with the timing of the Blasey announcement (though it was to some degree not within her power to do much else, since Dr Blasey did not want to go public until, if I understand correctly, her name was leaked). I will also concede that the questioning by Dems was a fine display of political grandstanding (comparable to many instances of GOP grandstanding, by the way).
But let's get real. The president cozies up to despots and insults friends. He is wilfully ignorant about Russian efforts to subvert American democracy. He exhibits chaotic, psychotic behaviour on a daily basis. He constantly berates the real press, like a wanna-be dictator. He expects the DoJ to do his bidding, again like a wanna-be dictator. The GOP embrace all this utterly lunatic behaviour. They proudly brag about obstructing all things Obama for years. They refuse SCOTUS nominee Garland. And now they fast-track a flawed (to put it mildly) SCOTUS nominee. And you are embarrassed by the Democrats? Surreal.
There are many things to be afraid of in American politics at the moment, and the vast majority of them are on the GOP side of the fence.
7
Reasons why the GOP want Kavanaugh to be rushed through without any investigation?
1) He will protect Trump in any criminal liability
2) He will overturn Roe vs. Wade
3) He will protect Citizens United ruling so the top 1% can continue to buy US elections
24
When will the Pope investigate the Jesuit institution where so much lawless behavior went on among its students?
The Pope is a Jesuit. It’s his territory that supposedly education the young man whose teenage deeds are coming back to haunt all of us!
2
"This has been a drive-by shooting when it comes to Kavanaugh," says Lindsey Graham. Why is it that Republicans so often run to the comfort of guns when speaking metaphorically? If guns are involved, shouldn't that merit an F.B.I. investigation of its own?
Speaking metaphorically, this hearing process has been a road kill of Americans, D.O.A.
7
This whole process is pathetic and absurd. Our judicial system, especially the Supreme Court, is supposed to be above politics. Yet here we are: President Obama's nominee was not even considered, supposedly so the people's voice could be heard. By a margin of millions the people said, "I'm with her." The man to whom the nation said "NO" promised to be "President of all of Americans." He nonetheless nominated a judge proposed by a right-wing group. At some point Republicans took the "nuclear option" to remove the filibuster from judicial approvals, and now we're haggling over whether to extend the process past elections that could shift what has promised to be a razor-thin, strictly party-line vote on the nominee. This is a lifetime judicial position. I don't care what party you belong to, as an American you should demand a nominee with more bi-partisan support than this.
10
@LW Neil Gorsuch won his seat on the Supreme Court with a one vote majority.
I am astonished at the political power plays of the GOP in Congress. What is the matter with Grassley? He's lying. Why isn't his lie being called by everyone? No one should be permitted to get away with treating a traumatised person in the way that the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee is treating Dr. Blasey. It is simply beyond reason that this should happen in a country which considers itself to be a light set on a hill, or a beacon of hope for humanity. This is nothing but bullying on the part of Grassley and the GOP. Bullies are a beacon to no one, and so long as the US presidency is held by a bully, and is mirrored by bullies in Congress, one can only wonder at the diminishment of the Republic which has such a high opinion of itself, and seems unable to act in accord with the standards presupposed by its own self-image.
10
To the Editorial Board:
Your subjective interjection's regarding Ford's claims:
It’s possible that she is misremembering events or even making them up, although it’s hard to see how people could imagine themselves benefiting from doing that.
Quick reminder to you that you run a newspaper with a searchable archive with a multitude of stories involving false and retracted allegations of sexual misconduct. Feigning ignorance at motives when there is a surfeit of precedent in your own paper amplifies the voices of those who scream "Fake News" in your direction.
Perhaps read and learn something from your own coverage of:
-the Central Park Five
-the Rolling Stone UVA rape hoax
-the Duke lacrosse hoax
At the heart of all of the cases mentioned was a lie that once had the imprimatur of a "credible" allegation.
5
Remember back in 1994, when NYT columnist Frank Rich wrote this about Paula Jones who accused Bill Clinton of sexual harassment, "Mrs. Jones comes across as a consenting adult -- and there isn't even any direct statement that a sexual advance, encouraged or angrily rejected, occurred behind closed doors"?
Remember back in 1998 when Rich wrote, "So many women who may be lying on TV, so little time." In his piece, titled The Liar's Club", he trashed Bill Clinton accuser, Kathleen Willey.
Instead of editorializing, why doesn't the NYT talk to Juanita Broaderick, who accused Bill Clinton of raping her? Broaderick said recently of the Times, “They have not contacted me at all in the last few years that I am aware,” she said.
Fast forward to today where the White House is occupied by someone The Times despises, rather than someone it adores, and new NYT mantra regarding sexual harassment is, "If she said it, of course it's true". The textbook hypocrisy readers have come to know so well.
8
i must be a little dense and im glad the ny times is there to correct us.
re the bush request for an fbi investigation
werent thomas and hill both federal employees when the alleged incident occurred
and what jurisdictional authority does the fbi have to investigate a maryland supposed crime
2
“No accident' Brett Kavanaugh's female law clerks 'looked like models', Yale professor told students”
While the editors of the Times were a sleep look what The Guardian came up with.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-...
4
The sad fact is that an FBI investigation of this matter would not cause a delay. If set for top priority it would take 2-3 days. Republicans simply do not want the facts to come out. Period.
15
Ms. Ford is more a victim of Sen. Feinstein than anyone else. Sen. Feinstein had her allegation in July and could have presented it to the FBI then as they were executing the background investigation for Judge Kavanaugh (his 6th...). She did not. The esteemed Senator wanted to maximize the political impact of this allegation in an attempt to delay or sink the nomination after it became obvious other efforts failed.
Sen. Grassley is absolutely right in moving forward with this. Whether there is any merit to Ms. Ford's allegation is immaterial. Sen Feinstein, through her very deliberate actions, has made this into a highly partisan issue. Ms. Ford's insistence of an FBI investigation before she is willing to testify under oath furthers the republican narrative of Democratic dirty tricks. The blame for this circus is fully at Sen Feinstein's feet.
I find it interesting that the left feels this circus is justified because of McConnell's refusal to hold a hearing on Merrick Garland. A couple of hard truths on that mess: 1) Republicans controlled the Senate at that time and 2) the filibuster rule was still in effect. If McConnell had relented and held the hearings (as I personally this he should have), chances are excellent he never would have gotten out of the Judiciary Committee and, if he did, would have been rejected by the full Senate in favor of waiting for the election. As such, the "Garland Justification" for Democratic bad behavior here is a bit hollow.
3
And what of Clarence Thomas? Shouldn't we also be avidly addressing the heinous particulars that Prof Hill revealed in the 1991 confirmation hearings? Should we not be decrying Thomas today for his sordid past? He lied under oath, preyed on Anita Hill, and enjoyed watching pornography. And he was seen "fit" to serve on our highest court. By those standards, I guess Kavanaugh is a shoe-in.
Congress grossly erred in 1991. Have we not "come a long way, baby" that we can boldly prevent this from happening again, in 2018?
8
The Senate Republicans did not delay Merrick Garland's confirmation they blocked it.
12
To hear President Trump tell it, we can't even trust the FBI to do an unbiased investigation. Those "deep state" agents and agents who vote for Democrats are all out to get him and in this matter, HE is the real target of the investigation because everything is always about him.
8
Senate Republicans seek Justice--Kavanaugh. The American people deserve justice, rather than a kangaroo court. Hatch and Grassley, both who served on the judiciary committee back when Anita Hill's accusations against Clarence Thomas were smothered, are now the chief kangaroos. Hatch has publicly given his opinion on Dr. Ford's accusations. Committee chair Grassley has, in judicial terminology, been 'arbitrary and capricious.'
Dr. Ford, whose life has been threatened and who has been obliged to relocate her family for security reasons, was given a Friday morning deadline to submit her written testimony for a Monday morning hearing. Why such a rush on such an important confirmation hearing. Didn't McConnell wait over 400 days without a hearing on Supreme Court candidate Garland?
Dr. Ford seeks a fair hearing--witnesses interviewed and, perhaps, lawyers questioning all witnesses, including her and Kavanaugh. Any court room judge would acknowledge the reasonableness of her requests. It seems just to delay the arbitrary hearing date and pursue an appropriate process.
I am an 84-year-old white male who supports MeToo. Far too long women have been dismissed when raising persuasive accusations about male assaults. To have a Grassley/Hatch bunch of male Republicans judging the validity of Dr. Ford's testimony and Kavanaugh's flat denial does an injustice to kangaroos, who, I understand, are kind and considerate animals.
162
@Keith Wheelock Well said. Thank you. Men who do not stand up for women debase the rest of us. People presume that we have no morals and just defend our kind. I am reminded that justice begins with the accused class not defending themselves but to seek the truth. Racism ended not becuase of the activities of blacks but by the actions of whites who no longer supported the status quo. The same is true for sexual assault. When men demand change it will occur. We can clearly see who stands in the way of progress.
@Keith Wheelock
I whoeheartedly agree!
It’s gamesmanship. Why would it be anything else? The archaic idea that we only have two parties creates this situation from now through eternity. What’s the bad for one is good for the other; Tit for tat.
It’s time for a credible third-party, so that one party cannot derail everything by merely slinging mud at the other party.
It’s like listening to two siblings arguing. We need an adult to stand up and show that both sides are wrong.
3
There's no way these accusations should be given anymore attention. If Dems on the committee thought her story really merited an investigation, they would brought it up as an issue when they received the letter this summer.
7
@Mark Better late than never.
Blasey should absolutely not testify to the Committee until an investigation is done. In order to not fuel baseless accusations, speculations and guessing, the facts that are available must be established. It is totally unfair to expect an individual to effectively take on the Senate Judiciary Committee without that.
After all, why NOT have an investigation? Perhaps because those in charge don't really want to know the facts? Perhaps because engaging in baseless accusations and speculations is actually their strategy?
Sure, they can confirm Kavenaugh, and they likely will. And then they will celebrate as if they accomplished something great. But everyone knows, and it will go down in history, that the Emperor has no clothes.
4
The FBI has already said there is nothing for them to investigate.
There are not enough details in Dr. Ford's allegations to warrant an investigation by any police agency and the time period is well past the statute of limitation. I would not be surprised if more women come out of the woodwork in an attempt to allege they were assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh too.
This entire charade is nothing more than an attempt to delay Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation vote. It is making a mockery of the process and the Democrats prefer the role of court jesters rather than lawmakers. Very sad.
An investigation will prove nothing. And if it would the Dems would have done it or maybe they already did? As is very apparent Judge Kavanaugh is a political operative of one party, a political person through and through. As was Earl Warren, Wm Howard Taft and any number otherwise qualified political people.many have agendas. If Kavanaugh’s opinions are contrary to the will of the majority , and if he sways the court then Dems will be elected and write and pass their laws. And lastly we all have to ask how can the republicans continue to hold sway with Trump as president, unless...republican agendas really reflect the majority in USA. I for one find both parties equally obnoxious, and their agendas extreme and irrelevant.
2
@Mel
Heath care for all Americans is irrelevant, we got it.
The Shakespearean drama continues. In the history of American tragedies, Mitch McConnell must go down as one of the most nefarious, ever. From shirking his constitutional responsibilities with an unprecedented power move in stealing a Supreme court seat from the voters, to running ominous backroom politics, this committee move has his signature all over it. Some people prize leaders who get things done no matter the ethics. Most of us see it for what it is, misguided evil.
12
Even Anita Hill was given an FBI investigation into her allegations. Two of the same Republican senators who sat on that (horror show) committee are serving on the present Senate Committee 27 years later. Not only has nothing changed for them, it has gotten far worse.
2
Since the accuser in this case is clearly bright and responsible, and she discussed the alleged event prior to the Kavanaugh’s nomination - and knowing how the Republicans would react to her story (they are unfortunately very predictable), why would a woman like this put herself and her family through this ordeal if it wasn’t true. Answer: they wouldn’t. Not to mention that after reading about what Kavanaugh has said in the past re: his drinking, and reading what Judge has written about women and alcohol, there is no doubt in my mind that Kavanaugh assaulted this woman. So - it is a fairly safe bet that plenty of Republicans also don’t doubt it happened. I only hope that there are two Republican members of Congress willing to do the right thing for a change (boy do we ever need McCain). (Not to mention, even without this allegation, Kavanaugh should not be confirmed based on his other prior unacceptable behaviors)!
Go blue in November or things will get a lot, lot worse.
15
What really matters are the needs of the American People - the people for whom the Court and the Constitution, which it must uphold, exists.
It does not serve the People, when any Justice is confirmed with a credible accusation of harassment or assault hanging over them. Such an accusation never goes away, as we know from the cloud that hangs over Clarence Thomas.
We cannot place before the People, Constitutional responsibilities that affect We the People decided upon by a flawed process yielding flawed Justice.
7
This has been drive-by shooting when it comes to the Kavanaugh nomination, with his sites set on the Constitution.
1
If I were advising Dr. Ford, I would urge her to petition the Maryland attorney general to investigate an attempted rape by Brett Kavanaugh occurring when she was in high school; this should be done no later than tomorrow, September 21, assuming the FBI has not begun its own investigation. Then, I would advise her to hold a press conference Sunday evening before the scheduled hearing the following day, wherein she: agrees to testify before the committee upon completion of a genuine investigation of her allegations, by the State of Maryland, the FBI, or another credible investigative body, but not before; reiterates her complaint against Kavanaugh, who she told about it at the time and subsequently; how it has affected her life; why she has chosen to end her silence now; what she has already endured as a result of coming forward. Politely but firmly decline to testify before the committee the following day pending the completion of a credible investigation of her complaint.
6
Eight years ago I was arrested for stalking by a police department who, without investigation, took the word of a woman, acting solely on her sworn statement. The police department presumed that a woman would not make such a serious charge if it were not true.
Fortunately I leave an almost continuous digital/GPS footprint and was able to account for my exact whereabouts during all three of the alleged incidents she claimed. The charges against me were forced to be dismissed when I proved absolutely that I was no where near her. She had fabricated charges in retaliation after I fired her husband.
No charges were ever brought against my accuser because the DA was of the mindset that a woman would never lie about such serious matters. Air-tight alibis no longer matter in instances like these.
How much more difficult would it be for a 35 year old claim where the accuser gives little, if any, information to actually investigate.
Unfortunately, women know two things.
1. They can make a claim involving harassment, sexual assault, rape, or other sexual-related crimes and even if they are false, the accused is considered guilty and forever tainted.
2. Many detectives and DA's have bought into the false narrative that a woman would never lie. They bring charges, only then to perform a half-baked investigation. By then, the damage is done.
Sexual-related crimes have become a social, financial, and political weapon.
Far too many falsely accused men know that all too well.
5
I weep for our democracy.
5
The Senate Supreme Court Nomination process became a spectacle (in a very bad way) when Mitch McConnell decided that he would not bring President Obama's nomination for consideration for no good reason other than partisan politics.
11
In the worst escenario, the senate ignore everything and Kavanaugh is selected. It’s posible to proceed with the FBI investigation and if he is laying, could be prosecuted?
What a mess! A year ago in the pre-Me Too era this might have played out differently. But no matter, we're now well into Me Too, and we're playing by those new rules—which are unwritten and are being developed on the fly.
Probably the best ending for all this is that Judge Kavanaugh does the patriotic thing and withdraws. A more likely ending is the Republicans tough it out and have him confirmed by the narrowest of margins, which then becomes one more weapon for the Democrats to use against them. Except the Democrats don't even have to do much—the public perception is that these are a bunch of old guys increasingly out of touch, especially on issues that in any way involve women, and the “tough-it-out” strategy reinforces that.
What makes things worse, of course, is the continual weighing-in of President Trump. We all have our strengths and weaknesses, and two of President Trump’s greatest weaknesses are his total inability to simply shut up about anything but then also his tendency to say whatever idea has entered his mind, no matter how inappropriate or unhelpful.
So in his desire to nudge things along, rather than doing what would be best—saying nothing—he continues to pour gasoline on this fire. Of course, what makes this even more insane is President Trump wants to personally be the one to convince us that Judge Kavanaugh is being treated unfairly, even though he himself is arguably the nation’s #1 Me Too perp who has beaten the system.
4
If Dr Blasey is reluctant to testify in front of a mostly male unsympathetic Senate Committe, I don't blame her. I wouldn't do it either. She would probably be subjected to an inquisition-type of scrutiny and cross examination, put under terrible pressure because the Committe members want to rush the procedure and confirm the nominee. She would be victimized a second time. She should not do it without prior investigation.
8
Yes so we can determine whether this incident that happened an unspecified location, at an unspecified time, at an unspecified party, with an unspecified number of witnesses (4 or 2?), 36 years ago.
Oh and since he has categorically denied any of it, he's obviously guilty, since only guilty people would deny it, not an innocent person. No, clearly an innocent person would not deny it, since they are innocent!
How could I forget, lets get the FBI to investigate this incident that happened an unspecified location, at an unspecified time, at an unspecified party, with an unspecified number of witnesses (4 or 2?), 36 years ago. Yes, that's clearly what we should do.
Beam me up, Scotty, I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
5
No.
What needs to be investigated is how this dirty trick was set in motion by Senator Feinstein and the rest of the Democrats.
Sit on the letter accusing a SCOTUS nominee of malfeasance 36 years ago (!) for months, release a redacted version after all the relevant hearings are held, and then coordinate with the accuser to cause maximum damage to a decent man.
Oh, and FWIW, now the accuser will not even testify before the committee because — wait for it — she and the delay-tactic Dems wants the FBI to investigate something the accuser cannot even give any specifics on.
And even though Senator Grassley has offered the accuser what she wants — open session, closed session, whatever — that’s not good enough for Dems who now claim ‘bullying.’
The reality is that Democrats are now the party of guilt based on accusations alone. ‘By any means necessary,’ it appears. As such, that party is a threat to liberty in this nation and must be kept as far away from political power as possible.
Shame on Diane Feinstein and the Democrats.
9
My take:
—
Let's say that for the sake of argument, Judge Kavanaugh *did not* force himself on Dr. Ford. Then why doesn't he take a polygraph test, just like she did? Because if it comes out clean, like hers did, then we're done. Chalk it up to mistaken identity. Apologize. Move on! Forgive, and forget.
—
Now suppose that young Bret *did* attempt to violate young Christine, all those years ago. Say, he takes the polygraph test, and flunks it. Then what? Shall we reconvene in juvenile court? That’s where it would have gone, if someone had had enough sense to intervene.
Don’t forget, that Ford and Kavanaugh were both teenagers when all this happened. Chances are, they were *both* at fault! Use your imagination: “…An unchaperoned party, deafening noise, underage drinking, promiscuous behavior..." And we know from our own experience, that teenagers do incredibly stupid things!
—
So one way or the other, why should Congress, the media and the public proceed to ruin both lives, both families and both careers? For what? Politics? Oh, I forgot. The media frenzy(!) Or maybe to satisfy the ever increasing *bloodlust,* on the part of the public.
And now who’s being "stupid"?
—
So why don't we just drop it? Sex sin is very old news.
And as a nation, we can do better. Much better.
@ppromet To presume they were both at fault is absurd, and only something a male with zero experience having been assaulted could think of. If Travon Martin was a threat worthy of vigilante justice, Kavanaugh's drunken attempted rape is worthy of investigation.
4
Hurry, hurry, hurry. What’s the big rush? The truth, so carefully hidden regarding the kind of man Kavanaugh may slip out. If the GOP has
the temerity to treat her like Anita Hill the Democrats and the female senators make will make these Republicans look extremely anti woman to the American people.
This should be televised and it will be fun to see how Kavanaugh slips and slides about his claimed loss of memory.
If a man is a liar, a bully at 17 with contempt for women he will be so at 27 and 37. Our president is an good example of that.
The other day I heard someone say that she believes that good men sometimes do terrible things. No, no, no, if you do terrible things you are not a good man, because good men do not do terrible things like rape and lying under oath.
Even at 17 what dies a rapist think he doing to another person’s life. She is certainly not going to forget. He thinks it will be his word against hers. All you have to be is a good liar from a good family. We will see if that works when the damaged victim swears to tell the truth and does.
Since a lifetime appointment is at stake, Kavanaugh has the burden of proof; because he has something to gain and Dr. Blasey, who has had to surrender her privacy to tell the truth who has nothing at all to gain. We need no investigation. The public will make their beliefs known within hours. So please take the stand Dr. Blasey and tell the truth and save the Supreme Court further disgrace.
10
One reason his supporters champion Kavaaugh is they hope he can over turn Roe vs. Wade. But then you have to wonder about the pregnancies that can result from these events such as what Dr. Ford and many other young women have endured. I fortunately didn't get pregnant when it happened to me. But what if?
Kavanaugh would have to recuse himself from any case regarding women's rights?
8
I am not a Kavanaugh fan. His extreme right-wing ideology, inexplicable and irresponsible debts, and his apparent dishonesty are repellent and should be enough to disqualify him. An allegation about an albeit terrible act when he was a teenager is an effective smoke-screen distraction from these present issues. And even if it is true, he is obviously not the same reckless teenager he may once have been. Further, if he is exonerated from the sex-attack accusation, which is likely, it will be easy for Republicans to sweep away the current and relevant concerns with a “See? He’s innocent!” — and the other issues vanish.
4
Did Senator Feinstein's office leak Dr. Ford's allegations to the press when they had nothing left in their toolbox to slow down Kavanaugh's confirmation? I'm not doubting Dr. Ford's story, but the games being played in Washington are beyond comprehension.
8
@Angie Roberts Feinstein needs to go. Everyone is concerned now about the Republicans rushing through this issue that was brought to Feinstein's attention 10+ weeks ago. Why did Feinstein wait? My guess is to delay any Kavanaugh replacement that might be offered up by President Trump until after November. Feinstein (and the Democrats; especially Blumenthal) doesn't care about Ms. Blasey Ford.
Truth has been the enemy of GOP for long and odiously of DT. They will make every attempt to hide it and hide from it.
10
This spectacle of these same old, angry, white males browbeating, intimidating, making demands commanding the appearance of a victim. The same men who eviscerated Anita Hill. Announcing they have their long knives out for any woman who dares to "persist" and calling that an invitation. When will enough be enough?
When will it be TIMES UP for the he-men woman haters of the angry old white male evangelical hate party of the GOP?
20
What is to investigate if Blasey won't take the stand and tell the Senate Judiciary Committee the truth under oath?
Blasey has brought grave charges against a fellow human being -- causing enormous anguish to his family, halting the business of our government, and harming all genuine victims of sexual assault whose credibility will be thrown into doubt by Blasey's bizarre behavior.
She now has a duty to put up or shut up. How dare she start playing games with the process and try to dictate its course? Her honor is as much, if not more, on trial as is Kavanaugh's. If her story doesn't hold up, her behavior will be judged to be infinitely more despicable than anything she has alleged about Kavanaugh.
The truth of what did or didn't happen 35 years ago won't change between now and Monday or next week or between now and eternity. If she has made her accusations in good faith, then she is ready to testify now. So what possible grounds are there for delay?
And why is she lawyering up? I don't want to hear her lawyer's story. I want to hear her story.
Senate Democrats have not made any secret about their determination to sidetrack Kavanaugh's nomination by any means necessary. I wonder if Blasey learned the wrong lesson from them -- and from the #MeToo lynch mob -- namely that the end justifies the means, including making bogus accusations of sexual assault in the righteous cause of blocking Kavanaugh?
If Blasey does not testify, the Senate must confirm and move on.
26
@Ian Maitland
She should not participate in a perfunctory process designed by Republicans to give the false appearance that they actually care.
7
You are calling this a bogus accusation! Do you have first hand knowledge of what occurred? This woman if facing death threats for coming forward with this! Kavanaugh
Has acknowledged drinking in past on his yearbook!
If he is lying under oath does this make him a viable candidate for Supreme Court?
3
@Ian Maitland
you’re putting a “trial under oath” before investigation. That’s nonsense!
To begin with, the Committee is charged with investigating Judge Kavanaugh’s fitness.
Dr. Ford’s information should not become a “trial” against her.
Nominee Kavanaugh should withdraw.
3
Serious, yes; but, credible?
Just because uttered by a woman about a man alleging abuse does not necessarily equate to credible.
So, no complaint for decades; no allegation when he was appointed to the US Court of Appeals; her complaint originally alleged four guys but she now says its just two in the room; no witnesses; no contemporaneous outcries to anyone; now she won't testify privately or publicly; dozens of females who attest to the contemporaneous courteous treatment of all women since and including high school.........No, I think Dr. Ford has a serious credibility problem and such cannot mask her democrat affiliation coupled with her activist democrat lawyer.
In a trial, without the hysterics of Washington DC, this case would be thrown out of court.
9
The GOP is destroying the Supreme Court. Mitch McConnell's sandbagging of Merrick Garland combined with the old white men on the Judiciary Committee attempting to bully Dr. Ford in an effort to be rid of her show us how the Republicans are manipulating SCOTUS appointments for purely ideological reasons that have nothing to do with the good of the country. Or fairness. Or constitutionality.
If the Senate further abuses Dr. Ford, they will rue the day Brett Kavanaugh was ever nominated. Putting another arrogant, lying, compromised and morally dubious man on the court (see: Clarence Thomas) after refusing to honestly address these serious accusations of misconduct would be an outrage, particularly to women (who know that Kavanaugh is only there to facilitate overturning Roe and to protect Trump from being subpoenaed).
The Republican Party is broken. In their zeal to further only what serves their fanatic ideology, they are destroying our institutions as normal Americans watch with our mouths hanging open.
Vote in 2018 and rid us of this outrage!
13
A national disgrace...
Women and non-whites need to take control of the House, Senate in 2018 and win the Presidency in 2020. Then, and only then, can we honestly and truthfully change the course of history whereas many of our current and past problems have been created, instigated, perpetuated, and implemented by White Men.
We can't change the past, but we can definitely change the direction for America to pursue in creating a more moral, inclusive, and equal society than has never been seen in our country's short history on this planet.
6
The accusation is surely being investigated by the press whether the Grassley-Graham cohort of ageing myopics initiates a formal FBI inquiry or not. The truth will out.
4
"Sure, Democrats may want to investigate that claim fully. But so should anyone concerned about protecting the Supreme Court’s integrity." Dear Editorial Board, investigating an alleged attempted rape (attack ? assault ?) done 36 years ago by a teenager will NOT protect/affect the Supreme's Court's integrity in any way. Releasing those 90% of documents about Judge K might do that, and Dems may want to use this sexual assault allegation to derail judge K's nomination, as retaliation for various things related to USCOJ confirmations, but that incident from 36 years ago is irrelevant for the integrity of the SC. Is there another case where the stupid things (excluding federal crimes) that teenagers do are held against them some decades after ? You should have developed your argument for this new investigation of judge K, instead of just throwing out there an inflammatory suggestion.
2
Remember what happened to Obama's nominee?
6
@Bill
No one tried to ruin him personally with unprovable allegations from decades ago.
8
@jaco
because he wasn't even allowed a hearing , an illegal act perpetrated by
McConnell.
He was a qualified decent man;
Not someone who got drunk and tried to rape women.
4
"Sure, Democrats may want to investigate that claim fully. But so should anyone concerned about protecting the Supreme Court’s integrity."
Dear Editorial Board,
investigating an alleged attempted rape (attack ? assault ?) done 36 years ago by a teenager will NOT protect/affect the Supreme's Court's integrity in any way. Releasing those 90% of documents about Judge K might do that, and Dems may want to use this sexual assault allegation to derail judge K's nomination, as retaliation for various things related to USCOJ confirmations, but that incident from 36 years ago is irrelevant for the integrity of the SC. Is there another case where the stupid things (excluding federal crimes) that teenagers do are held against them some decades after ?
You should have developed your argument for this new investigation of judge K, instead of just throwing out there an
inflammatory suggestion.
2
@mynameisnotsusan
Teenagers have more than often committed murder and been sentenced for it!
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2018/01/03/teen-murder-hire-case-s...
http://www.lifedaily.com/story/15-teen-murderers-who-killed-using-extrem...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/10/pennsylvania.young.murder.defendant/...
And many more such news accounts.....google the following: Teenagers who committed murder and were sentenced for it
2
@mynameisnotsusan
Not Susan? Ok
I'm at a loss to your logic, you've taken a justification path that isn't appropriate for raising an individual to the highest jurist position in our Country.
First, honesty is critical for any judge and incredibly critical if not the most critical for setting a standard of excellence for all lower judges.
If the Judge testifies that he is innocent this is not an event 36 years ago, it's a current testimony. If untrue removed from any and all judgeships. He can return to being an attorney or a talk circuit personality.
And if proven innocent, the Senate can vote their preference on the Judge's worthiness to be a Supreme Court Jurist.
So stop with the false protection that youthful actions should not be held accountable for their actions. This is about truthfulness today.
And the potential of a lying candidate shouldn't float with either Republican or Democrats, period! We need the truth.
4
I have read that she has received death threats. I think this should also be taken very seriously.
14
There is no spectacle except what Democrats are making of themselves.
If she didn't bring it up for 40 years, who cares.
Even the liberals and posters don't care except to how it can derail Kavanaugh.
8
@True Observer
She brought it up several times in the past. Get your facts straight, and please don't vote in 2018 or 2020.
7
@True Observer Who cares? The majority of Americans care even if you do not. It's bad enough we have a sexual predator for a POTUS. We don't need yet another one on the Court. tRump has a long list of conservatives who could easily replace Kavanaugh and this could all be done before the midterms. But Kavanaugh fits the bill perfectly for tRump since he'll surely not indict when Mueller comes knocking. And this is exactly why tRump won't involve the FBI because he knows that your boy Brett is guilty as sin.
9
“I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close.”
In other words, our minds are made up, and not in Dr. Blasey's favor.
13
This is certainly a partisan, politicized investigation, and few really care if this accusation is true, or not. As to Mr. Kavanaugh, if he was really drunk, he probably doesn't remember. Unlikely his friend does, either. I am not assuming Dr. Ford is making up the story, though the crime was an attempt, not an actual deed. And, they were all teenagers at the time, she just 15.
Nobody is stating another, obvious question. Where there any adults supervising this raucous party? If not, why would a 15 year old girl, assuming she had standards, remain at a party with probably many drunk, unruly teenaged boys? Should she not take some of the blame for being, shall I say, equally stupid, as teens often are?
3
@Rosalie Lieberman: Nothing like blaming the victim.
What is the essential teaching of God and his son Jesus Christ? Is it to love thy neighbors or to hate LGBT people and abortionists? How terrible do they think the sins of homosexuality, transgenderism and abortion are for them to literally make God in their own image -- angry, hateful, and devoid of wisdom?
Is this what conservatism is? To fight to have a system that hates and marginalizes a whole group of people, and yes, to allow big corporations to pollute our air, water and earth as much as they want to, and in so doing basically self destruct the whole system?
3
"I'll listen to the lady:. Senator Lindsey Graham
Do not call me a "lady". I will not call you a "gent".
If I have to, I can do anything, I am strong, I am invincible, I AM WOMAN!
Women demand an FBI Investigation! We will march! We will vote! We will change our culture. Amen.
10
It looks like Donald J. Trump and the Big Bad GOP is afraid of having the FBI investigate Kavanaugh.
9
Women in this country deserve much better - whether it is better policy, equal pay or simple respect. But until more women are elected, appointed to corporate boards or even get a one single seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, it isn't going to happen.
5
MSNBC had footage this morning of the multitudes of women who are protesting at the senate offices of the old, white, supposedly christian men who think they have a right to tell women what they can do with their own bodies.
Good Job to all those with the courage to go out and fight for what is right. Naturally, they are being arrested by the "senate security strongmen and women".
OUR United States of America is in Constitutional Crisis and NOW is the time to fight like hell at every opportunity and in every way to preserve it.
WE THE PEOPLE will not allow the International Mafia Robber Barons to take over and destroy OUR lives.
Not now. Not ever.
7
It is not amazing at all that those who think that Dr. Blasey's claim is unbelievable are mostly men.
Just like men should stay out of the business of wanting to control a woman's body, they should stop analyzing why Dr. Blasey didn't tell every Tom, Dick and Harriet at that time the details of her traumatic experience at the hands - literally - of a spoiled Georgetown Prep Frat boy.
Meanwhile, some her classmates have come out and said that "heard" of the incident while in school, albeit without the gory details.
6
@Sarah...
Whether you like it or not, Dr. Blasey's accusation has yet to be tested, and, in fact, that accusation has only been made in a "confidential" letter to Sen. Feinstein.
On top of that, no one by a select few of the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have seen the full letter, so the indictment of Judge Kavanaugh has yet to seen by the rest of the Judiciary Committee and no one outside of that select group of senators and staff members knows just exactly what the accuser has stated.
By any definition, what Feinstein has tried to set up is a kangaroo court fueled by selective leaks and a media feeding frenzy.
If Dr. Blasey wishes to have her accusations be viewed with a certain amount of credibility, she needs to be forthright in testifying, under oath, about the facts as she sees the.
As to the FBI investigating her accusations...other than a revisiting of the background checking of Judge Kavanaugh, what authority does the FBI have to look into the matter? All assualts, sexual or otherwise, are state or home-rule matters, not federal. And the FBI is prohibited by its charter from infringing upon the rights of the several states to pursue any state offenses.
What is clear from all of this maneuvering is that the matter is being used as a political weapon, and thusly used to circumvent the legal an proper means of dealing with such accusations.
Your support of a drum head tribunal shows that you have little regard for the rule of law and civility.
3
@Sarah It really doesn’t matter who anyone believes or at least it shouldn’t. A percentage will believe her and a percentage will believe him. What matters is what can be proven. None of us and none of the senators know for sure what did or did not happen. There is very little to go on except for her accusation and gossip. The only witness has not to date collaborated the accusation. This makes the case a classic he said/ she said. Typically, the accused gets the benefit of the doubt in those situations.
2
@John: But it doesn't mean he should get the Supreme Court seat. Any hearing won't be a criminal trial over attempted rape.
Senator Lindsey Graham's declaration, "I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close" says it all. Dr. Ford seems like a nice enough lady and she can talk until she's blue in the face if she wants to, but whatever she says doesn't matter; my mind Is already made up.
Alleged attempted rape on a minor by a nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States of America about which he might have lied? Don't waste my time! we need to get this guy through before the midterms.
6
Hypocrisy is what is killing this country and eroding all trust in the political system. Trump is president because he promised to beat the political system over the head. Instead, he's beating Americans over the head with the political system.
That enough people voted for him, however, basically without any research, or even thinking straight, in the forlorn hope that he would, indeed, clean the system, will get everything they deserve for electing a fool. Problem is, so will the rest of us.
8
@James Devlin...
Enough people "voted for him" because "enough people" did research and found Hillary Clinton to be lacking on a number of fronts, none the least of which were ethics and humility.
The People have spoken. Get over it.
2
Why is Lindsay Graham getting so much currency? Is he the current edification of Strom Thurmond?
4
We should want Ms. Ford's accusation to be given the same consideration and respect we would want accorded to our sister, mother, or wife. And we should want the same standard employed to judge the allegations against Kavanaugh we would want shown if it were our brother, husband, or son accused. If that conflicts with our own political views and what we want to see happen to the nomination that's just too bad. You can have justice in a real sense or you can have politicized outcomes. You can't have both.
8
@DTB...
The liberal...er...progressive...er...whatever it is that they are calling themselves these days to evade having to accept any responsibility for the divisive...and derisive...ethic that is driving their attempts to win by accusation and inference that which they have been unable to achieve at the ballot box.
This latest charade will play a part in the November elections, and the liberal may just well see that their error was in assuring that the voters against their candidates will actually show up at the polls.
1
What exactly are they going to find in a 30 year old investigation. It is literally a case of he said, she said without any evidence.
Both folks have been wronged in this situation. But there is no resolution to make both sides happy.
8
I keep seeing "What's the rush?" questions. As the NY Times has already pointed out, most are confirmed, rejected or withdrawn in 25 days. It's already been over 70 days for Kavanaugh. There has been no rush.
Justice Sotomayor, 66 days
Justice Ginsburg, 50 days
14
@Steven
Your comparisons are laughable at best: neither of the justices here were accused of a crime.
6
@Steven The republicans let 100 days go by and wouldn’t allow Merrick Garland to be even considered... republicans, the worst kind of hypocrites ! Plus, Ginsburg and Sotomayor weren’t accused of a sexual attack on a young person.
6
@Steven
Justices Ginsburg and Sotomayor didn't face serious allegations such as this.
6
Dr. Blasey-Ford may request that the Maryland state's attorney open an investigation. As a victim, she can do this by notifying the police. There is no statute of limitations in Maryland on felony sex crimes.
16
@Barb Campbell
Supporting article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kavanaughs-accuser-deserves-a-fa...
The Republican Senate has shown us what it means to have power, to be in a position of power. They acquired this power by winning the election, and since then, as Linsey Graham said, "Losers don't get to pick judges."
It is not just Trump who ignores and abuses the rule of law and institutional etiquette. The Republican establishment did that long before Trump given the extraordinary amount of times they held up President Obama's choice of judges. They did not even have control of the Senate then. They did it by subverting the senate rules. In control of the Senate, they refused to even hold hearing on Garland saying Obama was lame duck 9 months before the election. Now they are less than two months before election, how are they not lame duck?
National debt and deficit used to be the death of this country, now it is not. They do not want big government yet they want government in our bedrooms. They say they want better healthcare for American people yet they are fight tooth and nail to remove protection for pre-existing conditions. They say government assistance makes us dependent but they keep giving it to big corporations and rich people.
Our politics is a charade. The Republicans in government and the Republicans as a group of people is a charade. For them, there is no truth too sacred to obliterate, no lies too outrageous to tell, no logic too obvious to twist. Their words are like words written in water, forever shifting and meaningless.
12
@Doodle...
Forgive me for asking the following questions:
Just who does the Constitution says has the right to nominate judges?
Just who does the Constitution says has the right to advise and consent with the nomination?
Just who does the Constitution say has the right to establish the rules by which the Senate operates?
Sorry, you are the one that is lacking in the understanding of our institutions and the process by which they operate.
Sorry, you are the one that is accusing the Republicans of a "charade" when they are actually following the rules and traditions that have been established for the confirmation of justice.
And, I am sorry to have to say, it is YOU that seems to be willing to impose YOUR view of how things are to operate in our democracy by trying to achieve by obstruction and innuendo that which you could not achieve at the ballot box.
That, in my book, is about as far from the rule of law and civic responsibility as it can get.
That, in my book, becomes a charade when you attempt to cover your perfidy in the flag.
1
Ford if she chooses to testify Monday will be able to tell her story directly to the world not filtered by the FBI the news media or anyone else.
There really is nothing to investiage. Ford does not know when or where the party was. There is no phyiscal evidence. The only other potential witness (Judge) remembers nothing. Hearing directly from Ford and Kavanaugh is the best way forward.
13
@Reader In Wash, DC Really? You have concluded there is nothing to investigate? How do you do that without an initial investigation. As a former investigator, I can only say that you are entitled to your opinion, as lame and partisan as it is.
5
@Reader In Wash, DC
The witness, Judge, first said he didn't remember, then said Kavanaugh didn't do it, and now says he won't testify under oath. If someone refuses to testify under oath, that should say it all, they are afraid to be caught in a lie. Judge also has written numerous memoirs about the drinking and debauchery of he and his friends in high school and beyond, all of that will support Dr. Ford's version of the events.
2
@Reader In Wash, DC
Your remarks are nonsense. There is plenty to investigate, starting with the 3rd person Ford says witnessed the assault: compel Mark Judge to testify under oath; Ford has named others who were at the party and they should be closely questioned; interview both therapists whose session notes include Ford's revelations about what happened; delve more closely into Kavanaugh's social network during high school and especially college/law school. These inquiries may produce a preponderance of evidence on one side or the other, and reduce the likelihood of a pathetic he-said/ she-said spectacle.
3
I believe the women - the 65 women who knew Brett Kavanaugh as a teenager, and say he was an honorable guy who behaved properly and didn't drink much.
Usually, in the case of a genuine bad guy, first one woman comes forward, then a few more, and then dozens. This hasn't happened. Instead, it is just the opposite.
Reasonable people will conclude that the accusation is wrong, and that Kavanaugh is telling the truth.
15
Reasonable people will also wonder why, after Dr. Blasey-Ford's allegations were made public, that only a handful of dozens of women contacted were willing to state that they stood by their endorsement. This reasonable person also wonders about how a 17 year old high school student somehow found 65 women who claim to have known him well enough to vouch for his treatment of women. To your point about other women coming forward.... perhaps there are none to come forward, and perhaps there are women who have reason to come forward and have decided that doing so is not worth the death threats and necessity to take there families and flee their homes.
3
@Jonathan
Fair enough. Invite each of these 65 women to give their high praise of the teenage Kavanaugh to the FBI or under oath before the committee. Reasonable people can then gauge the credibility of each once that's done.
3
@Jonathan I disagree completely with your assumption.FBI vetting of this candidate obviously missed a big issue.There was a witness who can be subpoenaed, and others may come forward.No one has suggested that Judge Kavanaugh is a serial rapist. The Supreme Court judges must exemplify the highest standards of ethics along with their knowledge of laws.Until an updated FBI vetting is complete, this man is damaged goods being shoved onto the highest court in our land.
1
"The drive-by shooting" callously thrown out there by the cynical Lindsey Graham is more applicable to the incredibly rushed, rigged hearings along with an artificially contrived "seat by" date.
Methinks the GOP hearings led by Grassley were so terrified as to what stuff could come out about this pick,including his promises to Trump, his character issues kept well under wraps, and his extremely evasive attitude and answers (I watched them all) that they simply put this on fast track, Democratic concerns be dambed.
It's precisely what they are doing to Dr. Blasey--trying to hurry the "little lady's" accusations in some sort of Kangaroo "he said, she said" court where one female faces a bunch of old angry white men he'll bent to get her put of the way as fast as possible.
This nominee is going to be ruling fairly on women's health decisions regarding pregnancy?
It sure didn't seem to bother him that night 36 years ago.
16
@ChristineMcM
Ms. McMurrow, it's a she said/he said matter as it stands now.
But this is not about a crime that was committed. The Senate is NOT the appropriate place for that sort of investigation to take place. And given that there is no federal jurisdiction for a violation of a state statute, criminal or otherwise, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has no authority in the matter.
This is a POLITICAL action, to be resolved by a POLITICAL hearing. And it is right that both the accuser and the accused have the obligation to speak if they wish to continue with the POLITICAL engagement.
If the accuser wishes, she can file a criminal complaint, making it a CRIMINAL matter that is under the jurisdiction that the alleged crime was committed.
But remember, once the accuser makes the complaint, the Constitution guarantees that the accused can confront his accuser, and that the accused will remain innocent until proven guilty.
At this point in this political hoo-haa, the accuser has yet to provide any evidence that would be admissible in a court of law, there is yet to come to light any physical evidence of a crime, and there has yet to come forward anyone that is willing to corroborate the events as the accused has alleged.
And, I really must ask what YOU were doing at that party 36 years ago that allows you to say that it didn't seem to bother him then...
Perhaps it was because nothing happened that SHOULD bother him.
I'll wait for the real evidence, thank you.
1
Word on the street is that leader McConnell is the key player here and that Grassley is following orders.
2
“leader” McConnell - sounds fascistic, no?
3
A curious situation arises if Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh testify under oath on Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. There can be little doubt that a federal crime will be committed during the hearing.
Comparisons have been made to the Anita Hill hearings. Hill did not allege that Clarence Thomas committed a crime. She accused him of sexual harassment in the workplace. Disgusting? Yes. A crime? Probably not. Nonetheless, the FBI took 3 days to investigate and presented their findings to the White House and the Judiciary Committee. It was concluded--almost surely inaccurately--that there were no grounds for Hill's accusations. Yet, Hill stuck to her guns under oath a few days later. As righteous as her position was, that she wasn't charged with perjury continues to be a mystery.
Blasey Ford is accusing Kavanaugh of criminal behavior (the statute of limitations is irrelevant here because we're trying to assess if Kavanaugh is a craven liar). Kavanaugh denies he tried to rape her. If there is no FBI investigation of this incident prior to Monday's hearing, there will have been no responsible assessment of the truth of Blasey Ford's accusation. So someone will have committed the crime of perjury during the hearing--but which one?
Is the Judiciary Committee willing to let one of the witnesses skate on a federal offense, or will they insist that justice be served by asking for the FBI investigation to be reopened so that the lair can be put behind bars?
4
@WDG Anyone can file a criminal complaint with the FBI alleging that Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath. Based on the evidence that the person presents, the FBI will decide whether to open an investigation. If it does open an investigation, it will work under the Department of Justice to decide whether to bring charges.
You seem to think that being appointed to the Supreme Court gives Brett Kavanaugh immunity from prosecution. Far from it. He can still be investigated, indicted, and charged. He can be impeached and convicted. He can be sued civilly.
Christine Ford in particular has many options to have her voice heard. Including but not limited to testifying on Monday. She seems not to want to do anything that doesn't mean holding up Brett Kavanaugh's vote indefinitely. That's telling.
2
@WDG You make an assumption not in evidence. If the FBI investigates (my vote is yes) and she sticks to her story -- she does not "recall" -- there is no lie.
The same is true for Judge Kavanaugh and Mr. Judge.
Not remembering is not a lie and therefore not a federal crime --
The "assault" is also not a federal crime. The State of Maryland would have to investigate and determine if there is a case.
1
@John Smithson I'm still trying to suss this out. I think the point I want to make is that an FBI investigation is inevitable. This hearing is not about any witness's OPINION on, say, abortion, or travel bans, or 1st amendment issues. Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh will be testifying about a crime having been committed. Blasey Ford will accuse Kavanaugh, and he will deny. One of them is lying--unless you want to allege drunkenness (Kavanaugh) or mental fragility (?) (Blasey Ford).
I've listened to many talking heads claim that the statute of limitations on attempted rape has run out. And in any case, it's a state crime that doesn't warrant FBI involvement. But those thoughts completely miss the point hidden in this curious situation. The FEDERAL crime--perjury by one of the witnesses--will be committed DURING THE HEARING. And then the Judiciary Committee will forced to say: "Well, she says he tried to rape her, and he says he didn't. One of them is lying. We're the legislative branch--what do you want us to do? The executive branch has to investigate this matter, and the judicial branch has to adjudicate it. But it's clear that a crime has almost certainly been committed in this hearing room today, and it would be an insult to this august body if we don't get to the truth of it."
Here is what is bothering me about this sordid mess - why doesn’t Kavanaugh want the same type of investigation Dr. Ford is seeking? Why doesn’t his friend Mr. Judge want to testify?
Their silence speaks very loudly as to their culpability in this matter. A Supreme Court nominee, even if he or she could get away with it, would not want a lie hanging over their head. And if Kavanaugh testifies to the Senate that Dr. Ford’s accusations are false, I’m 99.9% certain he would be lying, as would Judge.
And being too drunk to not recall is NOT a valid excuse.
12
If we've learned anything, it is up to American journalism to dig for and report the truth in this "alternative facts" world in which we live.
Go forth, NYT, and speak with the husband, the therapists (with the victim's permission), friends, family, and others who can substantiate the victim's story.
Also, Mark Judge has been no shrinking violet over his lifetime. Speak with his friends and acquaintances.
You may have a Monday deadline -- get to work!
15
@Didier
Absolutely spot on --I wish I'd written this!
Should Kavanaugh be confirmed and become the Trump's protector in a constitutional confrontation with Mueller, that would be the final nail in the coffin for the Supreme Court as a credible institution.
179
@B. Windrip
Yes and the fact that that is the actual reason that Trump obviously nominated him, makes this an unconstitutional appointment, because Trump was not thinking about the country, but himself, when he made the appointment..
Along with the Presidency and Congress.
Sometimes it helps to assume the worst possible motives to understand how to act.
Senate Republicans want to prevent an investigation because they are rushing to get Kavanaugh on the court before the mid-terms. They don't care about getting to the truth. Darn you, Republicans!
Senate Democrats want an investigation because it will delay or derail Kavanaugh's appointment. They don't care about getting to the truth. Darn you, Democrats!
So Republicans want the wrong thing for the wrong reasons and Democrats want the right thing for the wrong reasons.
The political motivations are an irrelevant distraction from what would otherwise be obvious. Kavanaugh, Blasey, and the American people deserve a full and fair investigation of these allegations.
7
@RG: You can rest assured that they project the worst motives possible onto you.
The United States is now being ruled by oligarchs - Dpnald Trump himself in sway to Putin and wealth Russians who've loaned him money and hundreds of Trump properties sold to Russian oligarchs to launder Russian money --- and the GOP Senate which exists solely to do the bidding of their wealthy donors.
Looking at you, Mitch McConnell - a thoroughly corrupt man unfit to serve in our government of laws.
13
@fast/furious: A nation governed by crooks is a kleptocracy.
2
The GOP senators are really SHAMELESS. United States of America is now Divided States of America ------Red America and Blue America. Red states voters will vote for the GOP candidates even they shoot and kill somebody on main street in broad daylight. So these shameless senators do not worry to loose in elections. It is American stupidity and tragedy.
7
Voters, please get these old, white men out of the Senate. They’re still living in the Dark Ages. Their time has come and gone. Gimme a break!
10
@Plumeria Yes particularly Chuck Schumer.
3
@Ralphie Fair trade. Schumer for all those old unscrupulous white Republicans. Especially, that traitor Mitch McConnell.
1
the FBI has a 'cold' case' dept....they invsigate very old cases every day....they are very good at it.
16
@greg anton best idea I have heard all day! All week!
2
Now that McCain is gone, Graham can fully revert to the troglodyte he’s happy at being.
20
So far we have an allegation and 3 individuals denying. the accuser has reached out to her high school classmates, trying to nudge them into "remembering" if she told them, while telling the rest of us she told no one. She said she wanted to testify, and now wants to set the conditions because her experience was so traumatic that it almost prevented her from being an esteemed Professor with a family that takes fun-filled ski trips. Apparently accusers believe they have been ensconced in the Constitution as a 4th branch of government who can determine where, when and how they testify after making last minute allegations against a thoroughly vetted nominee. They apparently also get to dictate FBI investigations. I look forward to hearing the accuser testify on Monday. So far it's 3 denials from individuals supposedly at the party versus her fuzzy recollection of pertinent facts. The media has already set about trying to impugn the men who have denied the accusations. Somehow all of these individuals are prejudged. Meanwhile, she has been prepping for this for months with lawyers, a polygraph, interviews, and social media scrubbing. It is time for her to tell her story. There is no doubt the accuser, her lawyers and the Democrat Committee members are scrambling to come up with a strategy to undermine Kavanaugh's nomination, which is really what this is all about.
15
Bravo. Simply brilliant.
3
Ms Ford claims that she was assaulted by Jude Kavanaugh and she has passed a lie detector test. Judge Kavanaugh is equally adamant that he never assaulted Ms Ford. The "witness" has declared that he has no memory of the event. It is totally possible that Ms Ford remembers the event, but the memory is a false memory. Although our memories seem to be a solid, straightforward sum of who we are, strong evidence suggests that memories are actually quite complex, subject to change, and often unreliable. We reconstruct memories as we age and also as our worldview changes. We falsely recall childhood events, and through effective suggestion, can even create new false memories. We can be tricked into remembering events that never happened, or change the details of things that really did happen. Malleable memory can have especially dire consequences in legal settings; highlighted areas of interest are children as eyewitnesses, sexual abuse, and misidentification.
3
@Joe This all sounds true in my personal experience. However, it doesn't help us much because it applies to all people, to Brett Kavanaugh as well as Christine Blasey and all the people surrounding them at the time. Kavanaugh could just as well have suppressed the memory of his actions and whereabouts on that date or under suggestion of others, created a totally false memory of where he was and what he was doing. So the fact of unreliable, incomplete, suppressed or suggested memories gets us no closer to the truth.
2
@Joe Geez Joe! You should write a novel.
1
@Joe: "It is totally possible that Ms Ford remembers the event, but the memory is a false memory."
Fear you may be conflating the phenomenon known as "recovered memory" with some jargon of your own, and respectfully suggest you read Richard Friedman's "Why Sexual Assault Memories Stick" from yesterday's NYTimes.
3
Dr. Blasey certainly deserves her day in court or, in this case, in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
If she was unprepared to do that publicly, then why did she write her confidential letter to Feinstein in the first place? In that letter, why didn't she request that an FBI investigation be started immediately, in July?
6
@cynic2
I suspect that she probably expected Feinstein to get something going, including asking the FBI to investigate.
Step back a moment.
Most people in this country are to involved in their daily activities to follow this hearing and will never care about this seriousness of this confirmation hearing. They will be aware on the sound and fury which will confirm their opinion that we live in a dysfunctional country that cannot wisely govern.
4
I'm confused about this. I don't see how the FBI qualifies as "a neutral body with experience in sexual violence cases." Does it? Someone please enlighten me. Also, another recent article in this paper suggested that such a request was unusual and unlikely to be granted because the allegations did not involve a federal crime and the events transpired so many years ago. I believe Christine Ford. I don't believe Kavanaugh should be appointed, for many reasons. I also believe that demanding an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh before she testifies is an obvious deal-breaker and therefore . . . well, like I said, I'm confused.
7
@methinks, you are incorrect. The FBI for decades has been doing background checks on all sorts of Executive Branch officials before they get appointed and Legislative Branch members who have access to classified information. This is part of what they do.
14
@jonathan and did 6 separate times with Judge Kavanaugh.
If the FBI thought a crime had been committed in this instance, they would refer it to Maryland authorities.
1
For some people, who tend to be white male and generally older, nothing has been learned since the interrogations of Anita Hill. They paid no attention to the evidence to the number of who women out there have had experiences similar to what Dr. Blasey's reported - or if they heard, they dismissed the message. They like having political power, and it makes a lot of them indifferent to how power is used to exploit and control women. Maybe not even indifferent but content. More and more, Senators look like members of an old exclusive men's club, making their deals outside of public view, keeping the drapes drawn.
Come Senators, Congressmen, please heed the call . . . don't stand in the doorways, don't block up the halls . . .
17
@cheryl - I like the allusion. Sadly, the times ain’t changin’.
2
Republican all-white boys will be Republican all-white boys.
25
@Jim Steinberg
Once upon a time feminists (including me back then) denounced stereotyping based on gender.
I see that among our bi-coastal elite, sexist stereotypes are now hip again. Ah, fashion conquers all!
2
Right, and sometimes so will African-American Supreme Court Justices.
The behavior of the Democrats on the Committee is legitimized only in comparison to the Republican treatment of Judge Garland.
The best point here is the observation that Supreme Court nominations have become viewed as a political trophy. To some extent this is a problem and it seems like an obvious problem resulting from the way the process was designed and politics has developed. Thankfully lifetime appointments tend to mitigate the whiplash that we see in other branches of government.
2
@SJG: Supreme Court nominations have become pitched battles over whether or not the US was established as a theocracy.
2
@SJG The Republicans did not demonize Garland or engage in slime and character assassination against him. They have never done that, not against any Democratic candidate. Borking is solely a Democratic tactic.
2
@Douglas Levene No, haha, they just denied him his rightful seat as designated in the intent of the Constitution. Why slime someone when you can just traitorously kill their career mobility?
Grassley is demanding Dr. Blasey's full statement by Friday morning. Guess what happens then. A copy is immediately furnished to Kavanaugh and his team and parts of it will be leaked over the weekend to make Dr. Blasey look bad. We know this game.
11
I wondered if it were possible for Maryland to investigate this. Apparently it is.
Not only a discovery that he very possibly committed the assault but the real possibility that evidence can be uncovered that he committed perjury before the Senate on this and other matters, could lead to his future impeachment.
How Putin would laugh. He has made a mockery of our means of choosing our President by helping to install this witless wonder of a whopping liar in the White House but in doing so, will have provided the means to throw the Supreme Court into utter disrepute.
The GOP Congress, on the other hand, needs no foreign help in disgracing itself.
47
@Christine It would be nice to know exactly when, where, and who was there when the supposed event happened.
3
@Rocket J Squrriel
Absolutely. That is why an investigation by competent investigators should be welcomed by Kavanaugh as well.
To anyone certain of Kavanaugh's innocence:
Why then fear an investigation?
Wouldn't an innocent person, if accused, be eager for an investigation?
Wouldn't an innocent person, if his or her accuser had received death threats, be insisting on a full investigation, if only so that any possibility of being haunted by these shocking allegations could be permanently dispelled?
Like Trump, Kavanaugh is not acting like an innocent man.
33
@Maria Ashot
The FBI already declined to investigate as there is nothing to investigate. Ford can say when or where it happen. Judge says it did not happen.
1
@Maria Ashot
To anyone convinced of Blasey's truthfulness: Why refuse to testify?
Isn’t Grassley like 85? Shouldn’t he retire?
10
@Truthiness
Are you advocating age discrimination? Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 84 or 85. I'll bet you don't want her to retire, at least not as long as Trump and the Republicans are in charge.
7
@Truthiness
You mean like Feinstein?
4
That’s also he age of Diane Feinstein, who lobbied the grenade
1
Goven the nuttiness and unreason on display all around, I see no reason at this point why Dr. Ford would show before this gang of kangaroos without an FBI investigation first.
So my suggest is that she write her account up, and publish it. It's not like it's Chuck Grassley's private property.
26
What has become crystal clear in this ongoing multiple car pileup of a GOP led Senate (and let us not forget the House) is for the American people, i.e responsible voters to clean up these Augean stables and disinfect it.
How about voters of whichever state Grassley comes from to show the rest of America good faith and recall him? can senators be recalled by the voters, what is a possible mechanism?
We have to start somewhere and fortunately for us Hatch is retiring but Grassley seems intent on hanging on for dear life. Maybe he wants to beat the Byrd/Thurmond records of serving in the Senate.
6
Lindsey Graham has gone off the rails since Senator McCain got sick and later passed.
14
How do you complete an investigation where you don't know where it took place, when it took place or even, if it took place? If Mrs Ford wanted an investigation, she could have requested it months ago. The FBI had a copy of the letter and included it in the background information. It should be up to the FBI to decide whether to investigate or not.
What we know is that Mrs. Ford believes that Judge Kavanaugh is lying , the Mr. Judge is lying and even her therapist is lying. After recently saying that another person was at the party, he flatly denied it as well, so I guess that Mrs. Ford also believes that he's lying as well. Or, it could just possibly be that she is the only liar here.
If Senator Fienstien wanted an FBI investigation, she could have requested one months ago as well. They chose to wait till the last minute.
She can choose to testify or not. She doesn't get to dictate Congress' schedule or what the FBI does.
23
@Steven
You wrote "The FBI had a copy of the letter and included it in the background information".
Wrong, the FBI only received a copy of the letter from Senator Feinstein - not Fienstien - last week.
As to Kavanaugh's classmate Ford, he changed his official statement numerous times, and wrote in a book that he drank so much to black-out again and again.
The supposedly "Honorable Judge" Kavanaugh said that he never was at "that" party. Now how did he know where and when "that" party took place.
Kavanaugh himself said just a mere 3 years ago that "What happened a Georgetown Prep, stayed at Georgetown Prep.
4
@Steven
Dr. Ford isn't "dictating" anything to anybody. She is asking that precedented protocols be followed prior to her testifying. As the article states, the FBI investiged Anita Hill's allegations during the Clarence Thomas hearings, and the investigation is "about protecting the Supreme Court’s integrity, not to mention the reputations of both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Blasey."
2
@Steven
This is about the appointment of a Supreme Court justice for life — someone who will influence all our lives for decades to come.
She most certainly does have the right to demand an FBI investigation — as do you and I.
1
I would characterize this ordeal as a murder-suicide. By lobbing in an 11th hour grenade in the form of an allegation that can never be proved or refuted, a highly-respected human has been sacrificed. His accuser will never get closure as well. No one will ever know what happened that night, but teens mixed with alcohol mixed with bathing suits mixed with lack of parental supervision at late night parties often end with something north of a G rating. In any event, kudos to the Dems who artfully manipulated this lost soul to their Machiavellian means to an end.
21
This “highly respected man” perjured himself on live TV while being questioned by Senator Leahy. The Senator summarized his case for perjury in a concise Tweet following the Hearing Day.
6
@Bill I find it ironic to call Democratic political moves as Machiavellian. That dishonor belongs to Mitch McConnell alone. I know of no senator in our history who has wielded enough power to wrangle and steal a Supreme Court seat. All other dark age dramas fail in comparison.
1
If it were not for the strategic timing of this charade I could agree with you; however, the timing by Democrats is so obvious that any fool knows precisely what’s happing: it’s clearly not about finding truth; it is all about politics and discrediting Trump. The people of this country are not blind despite all effort by the NYT to blind them.
18
Traitors ignore the Constitution. Traitors work against the people. Traitors undermine the institutions of the country. Traitors subvert the Constitution. Tell me how the GOP are not traitors.
26
Poor Chuck Grassley. It seems his memory is fading with the years. Doesn't he remember what happened last time he and Orrin ran a sexual assault Kangaroo SCOTUS Court?
Does 1991 ring a bell, Chuck? You and Orrin made a mockery of the Anita Hill appearance, then confirmed an alleged sexual abuser anyway. But it's what happened after that was so memorable. The Year of the Woman happened, and we took out our disgust on the GOP. I guess you forgot that part.
Well, GOP, rest easy. You have absolutely nothing to worry about. In no time at all, many of you will have more time on your hands than you know what to do with.
25
Spectacle? The Judiciary Committee hasn’t done anything. Nothing has happened. The column is just partisan palaver.
9
In GOP language to women voters: You and your accusations are not credible. Sorry, but we are in a hurry to get this questionable judge on the Supreme Court so we can take away your rights. Due process takes too much time and it took all our energy to hide his documents and his lies.
32
A single event involving reckless behavior, driven by inebriation and youthful sex drive, is not an indication of bad character. Incidents of this nature are a common occurrence in teen world, and should not be used as a means of disqualifying an individual from career advancement. In this case, any such action qualifies as a form of politically motivated retribution, that is punitive in nature.
In addition to what is now a legal entanglement snared in the protocols of governmental bureaucracy, we have the involvement of media affecting public opinion in favor of the accuser.
How can any inquiry be conducted fairly when the media is hyping “She’s been forced into hiding with her family after receiving death threats”? There is no way to prove that these calls are being made by radical adversaries. This is a legal imbroglio wherein nothing can be substantiated, because it’s tied to the emotionally driven political agenda surrounding the adjudication of freedom of choice, and access to abortion.
11
@Eifeld Is that what you would tell your daughter if she was ever in this situation? If so, then shame on you.
5
@Eifeld, 17 year-olds go to jail for attempted rape not infrequently. And the only reason that the accuser has had to go in to hiding is because there are so many rude, deplorable Republican and Trump supporters who reflect the same kind of attitude is you.
2
@Eifeld
If Kavanaugh committed that assault, then he is now lying in denying it.
That's a crime. Now.
2
Why is it that when a woman alleges sexual assault, she gets the death threats rather than the man who allegedly assaulted her? Who's the one accused of committing heinous acts here?
81
@Mike McGuire
Do you really believe she’s getting death threats? Beyond her activist lawyer telling us that no proof has been provided.
1
@Dr. M Methinks you underestimate the new cohorts in the Republican party or are in sheer denial of it. White supremacists and Nazi's are now their bedmates, mate.
These Confirmation Hearings are not the proper venue for making sexual allegations.
Each State has Civil and Criminal Courts that have jurisdiction over these types of cases.
The U.S. Senate has no authority to pronounce guilt or innocence or enter a Legal Judgement and Sentence.
The sad thing about this is America’s need to take sides. We have abosolutely no way of determining who is telling the truth , since we were not there if and when this bad behavior occurred.
We claim to be a Nation of Laws. Let’s follow them . Even when they don’t serve our agendas.
5
@Rush2jdgmnt The statute of limitations is up for Civil and Criminal courts but a politician's reputation extends past the statute of limitations. People get to judge one's character even if the crimes are past the statute of limitations. This allegation was sat on too long but if it is out there it deserves serious scrutiny. Republicans are rushing so they don't lose congress. They don't deserve a rushed hearing because of what they did themselves on the Garland nomination.
11
@Rush2jdgmnt This is not a criminal case. It is an investigation into whether the nominee is fit for a lifetime appointment to a pivotal position in our government which demands public trust to remain stable and respected. Or perhaps I should say become stable and respected once again.
8
@sleeve Ms. Blasey Ford has accused Mr. Kavanaugh of a serious crime, attempted rape.
In this country the accused is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, which the Senate is not.
It is up to Ms. Blasey Ford to bring civil or criminal charges and for her and the relevant legal jurisdictions to prove that Mr. Kavanaugh is guilty of attempted rape.
Without corroboration Ms. Blasey Ford's allegations become a she says-he says dispute based on the memory of someone who is unable to recall such basic facts as the day, month, year or city in which the alleged incident took place; in whose house the alleged incident occurred; whether 2 or 4 boys were present; and how she got to/from the house where the alleged attack took place.
1
Kavanaugh will do very well with this group of slimy Republicans behind him all the way. They stonewalled Garland’s chances and here, in the face of a sexual assault allegation, are hurrying to complete this nomination within a week/10 days.
Sure know how to circle your wagons, Senators. Misogynistic smug Republican macho creeps. Every one of you.
Within hours of Scalia's death, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that he wouldn't act on a new nomination by invoking — or, rather, inventing — the principle that a Supreme Court vacancy that occurs in a presidential election year can't be filled "until we have a new president." LA Times Editorial, 8/9/2016
“I made [a] pledge that Obama would not fill this seat.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaking At The Republican National Convention In Cleveland Last Month LA Times Editorial, 8/9/2016
20
Christine Ford's complaint should be heard. She should file a criminal complaint against Brett Kavanaugh with the police in Maryland. Attempted rape is a serious crime, with no statute of limitations in Maryland.
Police officials have come a long way in treating cases like this with the respect and dignity they deserve. The FBI and, especially, the Senate Judiciary Committee should play no part in this. Deciding guilt or innocence in a case of attempted rape is not their job. This circus does not do anyone any good.
Don't worry about timing. If Brett Kavanaugh did commit attempted rape 36 years ago, and he is confirmed to the Supreme Court while the facts proving that are still being investigated by the police in Maryland, you can bet his seat on the Supreme Court will be very short. He will be impeached and convicted posthaste.
9
@John Smithson: I sure wouldn't bet on it. If either chamber of Congress, or both, is in Republican hands, there will be no impeachment, not of Kavanaugh, maybe not even of Trump. He lies to Congress, the public, and the media on a daily basis and still has Republican support.
Nothing that the majority of voters who oppose Trump and the Republican party's agenda can say or do will affect the outcome of the nomination process for Kavanaugh. Republicans who have reasons to believe Kavanaugh will make decisions on court cases using ideological positions he has made clear throughout his career (which would be clear in the the documents hidden from voters by the Republican party) will use a tainted process to confirm an unfit nominee presented by an unfit president.
More and more of the voters in the US believe the election of 2016 produced a president who is illegitimate and whose actions and statements do not represent the values of the majority of people in the US. The Republican party's actions to uphold Trump and jam through agenda items not supported by the majority of people will cost them in the future. The old men of the Republican party do not care about their legacy nor about the health of the country they pass on to the generations which follow.
It is bad enough that Trump has shamed the office of the president. The Kavanaugh nomination process has shamed the Supreme Court and its decisions for decades. Garbage In. Garbage Out. No controversial SCOTUS decision will be considered as anything but a political tool once Kavanaugh joins Thomas and Gorsuch.
Shame on the Republican senators who had the power to stop this farce and chose their party over their country. Collins, Flake, Murkowski, Heller and other cowards.
239
@Lynda
Some chhose their party, and some only care about being re-elected. Either way, they are shameless. Redemption is possible but will likely not happen. But I hope I can eat those words!
3
@Lynda
Spot on and insightful. Thanks.
5
Republicans say they want Dr. Blasey to testify so that they can determine whether she's credible. SHE HAS ALREADY PASSED A LIE DETECTOR TEST, but they choose to ignore this. SHE HAS ASKED FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION, but they're refusing. SHE HAS ASKED TO INCLUDE WITNESSES, but they're refusing. THE THIRD PERSON IN THE ROOM, Mark Judge, IS REFUSING TO TESTIFY, but this causes no red flags. CLASSMATES HAVE CONFIRMED THAT SHE ACTED DIFFERENTLY, AND THAT THERE WAS TALK OF THE INCIDENT AT HER SCHOOL, but this doesn't seem to matter. KAVANAUGH HAS BEEN PREPPING FOR DAYS TO TESTIFY AFTER HAVING PREPPED FOR WEEKS FOR HIS HEARINGS, yet Dr. Blasey is given less than a week to prepare.
If Republicans push this through, after blocking President Obama's nominee and changing the rules from the 60-senator requirement, it will be the end of faith in American institutions by a majority of Americans and around the world.
WHY DON'T REPUBLICANS CARE?
34
@Barb Campbell
The claim that “there was talk at school” has been debunked. The woman, Christina King Miranda, who posted this subsequently deleted her tweet and stated “I have no idea if it happened or not” when she was questioned. As had already been pointed out, there could not have been “talk at school” after the supposed party, as Ms King initially claimed, given the alleged incident happened over the summer.
1
@Barb Campbell
Lie detector tests are inadmissible as evidence in just about every court in the country, because they are, or can be, highly inaccurate. Ms. Ford passed one, you say, but who was judging its accuracy? I've taken two lie detector tests in my life - one 55 years ago for a highly secured post in the U. S. Army, the other about 27 years back as part of a work-related
FBI investigation. In both, questions came up about my veracity when answering questions about alcohol consumption, which was almost hilarious given the fact that I almost never drink even a single glass of wine, have never been inebriated or close to being so in my life, have had no bad experiences even with other people or family indulging in alcohol, etc. So, what was the reason I went into the red on that question? I have no idea, and neither did the CID or FBI, who conducted the two tests. I got the army job, and had no problem with the later situation, but it left me with a lingering distrust of lie detector tests. If prosecutors and courts choose to ignore such results, why should Republicans place any credence in them?
3
Everything of any consequence that happens in this country happens for the good of the politicians, never for the people. The voters have the power to clean house but are too dumb to use it so maybe they deserve what they get.
@Clark Landrum: Everybody the Koch Kabal wants out of politics gets the Christine Blasey Ford treatment.
I am ashamed to say that my U.S. senator is Chuck Grassley. I've lived in Iowa 4 years, and two times in that period he has utterly and willfully failed to carry out his sworn duty to the Constitution. Two times as the head of the Judiciary Committee he has led the Republican effort to block proper "advice and consent" by the Senate on a Supreme Court nominee— first by stopping an Obama nominee and now by ramming through a #45 nominee in a sickeningly intolerant and domineering (i.e., fascist) manner. He failed to release the appropriate documents about Kavanaugh, going against all precedent while mouthing preposterous lies about how it's not important. Now he is showing that he doesn't care any more about claims of sexual abuse by a woman in 2018 than he did with Anita Hill in 1991 when he was on the same committee. (Women of Iowa, are you noticing?) He appears intent on installing some guy who will support #45's claims about executive privilege when impeachment time comes. Party over country. Grassley, you should resign in shame, but I'm pretty certain you don't have any. It is only left to me to be ashamed of you— and of Iowa for voting you in. It's sickening, because I believe in our Constitution and apparently you do not.
22
@JohnH
It's not about you or your shame.
@JohnH, Individually none of us matter to any politician in the US unless we are registered voters in their district or serious donors of cash.
Per usual this whole episode reeks of GOP corruption.I never thought for an instant that I would have to witness such a spectacle of dishonesty,partisanship,misogyny and everything the republican party and it's low life, lunatic president has put our nation through for the past 600 plus mind numbing days.With holding 1000's of pages of info on this mealy mouthed candidate for SCOTUS just proves how unfit he is for the job..probably perjuring himself under questioning and now possibly abusing a young woman while being a drunken frat boy.I say open this whole can of worms up and let the citizens of this country have their rightful say in our democracy.It seems every republican has something to hide...what is it???
4
@susan McCall: Their tax returns. Everyone who voted for Trump seems to think under-reporting income is a patriotic act.
I've been reading your front page. Looking for news that the stock market is hitting record highs today.
But all can find, is the same useless anti-Trump rhetoric.
At which point did this newspaper turned into a tabloid.
Sad!!!
9
@Wilfrido Freire
There is a Business section prominently displayed on the NYT website if you are interested in such news.
However, this has been headline news for many days now.
Additionally, you may wish to take note this is the Opinion section.
Opinions just may be voiced in such a section, though that is only my hunch.
4
@Wilfrido Freire: This is all binge-buying by corporate managements taking their own companies private.
1
@Steve Bolger
And you got this information from?
I also wonder why, if it's so "obvious," to the Trumpists that this is a like total DEMOCRAT hoax, they're fret this much about a briefish delay that'd set them up to go into the midterms with PROOF that your DEMOCRAT IS EVIL!
Where's the fear factor coming from, boys? After all, the latest alibi from the White House is that they trust the FBI's agents.
4
Why is her accusation credible - just because she says so?
Were not the McMartin preschool trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trialconvictions
"credible" - all based on recollections that turned out to be false! People were sent to jail falsely.
Since they are so good at it, let the NYT test the credibility.
The whole mess is another Salem Witch Trial. Shame on all the players!
10
@JePense really? What a reach, my friend. She discussed it with her psychiatrist 6 years ago; she knew Kavanaugh; scores of women who have through the same thing -- including some prominent outspoken conservatives -- find her story credible and believable; because Kavanaugh has far more reason to lie than she does; because she has no reason to stick her neck out and risk her reputation for a SC nomination; because we know by his own admission that Kavanaugh was into drinking and partying hardy in his younger days; the other man in the room refuses to testify and answer questions.
2
@JePense Dr. Blasey voluntarily took a lie detector test by a former FBI expert and was found to be truthful.
2
@JePense
There is a big difference between the prompted and coerced testimonies of pre-schoolers, whose claims bordered on the supernatural, and that of a mature adult who has come forward willingly.
Let’s stop pontificating about what an honest senate should do.
This senate has no scruples. Even if Kavanaugh had raped and paid for abortions for a dozen girls, they would try to shove him down our throats a la Fois Gras.
13
@New World: The whole scheme of Senate apportionment makes no democratic sense whatsoever.
David Leonhardt solemnly and disingenuously proclaims in the run-up to this editorial that "Senate Republicans are clearly operating in bad faith, as a Times editorial explains. They show little sign of wanting to get at the truth of what did or didn’t happen between Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford."
As if the NYT gives a fig about the truth of what happened. As if the Times would ever even consider for a nanosecond the possibility that Kavanaugh is innocent and that his honor is being forever tarnished in the most despicable manner.
What actually happened decades ago, if it happened at all, is, of course, quite conveniently unknowable in this politically weaponized, strategically-timed, he said/she said scenario. So the country is treated to the excruciating, incendiary, and destructive spectacle of Judge Kavanaugh being pilloried and Dr. Blasey Ford canonized. The Times gleefully fuels this toxic psychodrama in every single article and editorial. (See today's profile of Dr Blasy Ford.)
Where is there in the Times a single article defending Judge Kavanaugh or even the presumption of innocence?
Fairness and objective journalism deserted the Times quite sometime ago, and was replaced by zealous political advocacy. How dare you pretend otherwise. The Grey Lady is well and truly a rotting corpse.
11
@Caterina The Supreme Court is starting to look as credible as Halloween. I think that is their objective.
1
@Caterina Presumption of innocence pertains to legal, not political matters. Anyone who cares about finding out the truth would support an FBI investigation, just as was done with Thomas and Anita Hill. The Senate Republicans don't want it -- how about you?
4
@Caterina
The Times is, rightly, defending the right of the American people to have the FBI conduct a thorough investigation of this charge.
They have no obligation to defend or attack Kavanaugh or Ford.
This article, by the way, is an opinion piece, not a news article.
There is no such thing as a "serious" investigation of a 36 year old alleged teenage groping. It is laughable for the NYT to express concern for Mr Kavanaugh - they are an active part of a smear campaign. Lastly, the Democrats who are making demands to allow the woman to speak (scratch that - now demands for an FBI investigation) - have already said they are voting against him. This is gutter politics and character assassination at its worst.
13
@Chris
The FBI has successfully investigated older cases than that.
@Chris "groping" is a term insufficient to describe the attempt to rip clothes from a female while covering her mouth to prevent her from calling out. Secondly, re-opening a background check of a candidate for Supreme Court of the United States when a serious allegation arises has precedent. If Judge Kavenaugh was an honorable person, he would request both that the FBI re-open of his background check AND assert the rights of both parties to call whatever witnesses and people knowledgable about the alleged events to offer testimony to the FBI and to the Judiciary Committee.
1
@Margareta Braveheart "If Judge Kavanaugh was an honorable person" says everything about the lack of decency, honor and interest in fairness displayed by the democrats and their allies.
Aside from another mass shooting in MD city of Aberdeen, we can expect another October surprise...
POLITICO Playbook: A potential GOP October surprise
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2018/09/20/a-potential-gop...
Another revelation from Kavanaugh year book "Devil's Triangle."
Had to look it up, since I'm from Russia and wasn't familiar with this term.
According to Urban Dictionary it's threesome with 1 woman and 2 men.
Hmm...what could it possibly mean.
2
I wish we could focus on what really matters here.
Why did a woman who was sexually assaulted never feel that she could make a police report? Aside from the fact that she was a teenager and might not have known what to do, how can we improve our system so that no victim has to feel that reporting a crime is a worthless endeavor? Imagine as a parent if this was your teenager that came home describing that something similar happened to them feeling that they had no recourse?
One the other side, we need to do more to protect the accused as well. By nature, the accused suffers because many assume guilt. The person's reputation is tarnished which can lead to job loss or more. A person is innocent until proven guilty. Shouldn't there be a better way to have due process here?
And what about politics? Our politicians seem to be using a sexual assault to achieve a political goal? How low can we get?
Imagine for a moment that turns out to be a case of mistaken identity AND the democrats kill the Kavanuagh nomination. A person might not want Kavanaugh for different reasons, but is it right that we killed a nominee over a mistaken accusation and that the accuser went through hell by putting herself "out there" to get some answers and still doesn't have justice for her assault? What have we done here?
Let's find a way to use this situation to strengthen our laws and legal institutions to get this right. Enough already.
4
@David K Many police departments haven't even sent rape kits they collected out for DNA testing.
2
The unsavory characters around Trump, including his followers, well-connected to the likes of the Koch Brothers sound suspiciously like fascists. They even have their own brown-shirts.
7
@Rocketscientist, beyond a certain point of wealth accumulation, everything is about buying power.
3
This blatant politicization of the Supreme Court (SC) has to stop. In the era of Trump, the SC is the only institution that can prevent us from sliding towards chaos. Given Trump’s own problems in this regard, it is imperative that his appointee to the SC be squeaky clean when it comes to any allegations of sexual misconduct. Judge Kavanaugh can’t be viewed as squeaky clean, if the accusations brought forth by Dr. Blasey Ford are not investigated to the satisfaction of both sides. In the era of #MeToo, this rush to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to the SC bench is unseemly. Let’s not foster a #HeToo culture, in which women are left with the helpless feeling that he too – another powerful man – got away with sexual misconduct. Our SC and nation deserve better.
16
I reluctantly conclude that this is the result of the Democrats trying to stoop to the level of political chicanery perfected by the Republicans. The Democrats just aren't as good at it. Any way you look at it, the timing of the whole revelation, after being aware of the accusation for so long, was always highly suspect. The eleventh-hour demand for an FBI investigation only ratchets up the appearance of a desperate delaying tactic. Democrats, the damage has been done in this case. The Republicans will have their way, and we suffer the consequences. Taking back at least one house of Congress in November is absolutely crucial, but we must recognize it is only the first step of a necessary major correction that might take decades, if we survive that long.
9
She deserves to be heard but she does not have the right to accuse and then go silent. Testify or bring a case in court later. The FBI investigation ploy is something dreamed up hopefully by her lawyers or the Democrats not her.
6
Fwd: Brett Kavanaugh: I was his 8th Grade Teacher in English and Religion at Mater Dei School. He terrorized and Bullied Fellow student who was legally blind. The headmaster and I held him for detention and accounting for this scabrous behavior. Brett was without any remorse. This was 14 months before he allegedly forced himself on Ms. Christine Ford from Holton Arms School. Time to draw parallels on this outrageous behavior. I have been sending this to you for two months. I hope you now do something with it.
12
The more I see how our government operates, the more I want to sit down and cry. Everything seems to be politics and forget the welfare of anything or anyone. Very sad.
11
This one comment sums it all up:
"But so far, Senate Republicans seem more concerned with getting Judge Kavanaugh confirmed than in getting to the truth of the accusation against him."
Getting to the truth no longer matters to any Republican official or voter. Truth simply does not matter. The GOP is the party of dirty tricks, misinformation, and lies. My cynicism has risen to new heights in the last several years as I've seen politicians and voters repeat outright lies with a straight face.
I sometimes feel stupid that I ever believed anyone in politics actually cared about other people. What a selfish and deceptive bunch of hypocrites our leaders are. How can we believe anything our leaders say? We simply can't.
8
@cheddarcheese It's not cynicism; it is a realistic assessment of the plain facts.
Would people reading these comments or about to make their own please Please PLEASE first scroll down to an earlier entry by MelGlass, and read his entry. What I've checked out of his allegations seems factual, yet I have seen them mentioned nowhere in the media, yet much of it is of BOMBSHELL proportions.
@Joe Pearce
The so-called "BOMBSHELL" allegations to which you and MelGlass refer were debunked in a NYT article yesterday. please Please PLEASE do try to keep up.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/19/us/politics/christine-blasey-ford-kav...
2
@Joe Pearce
I guess you didn't make it to the replies to MelGlass, and didn't read the other article which refutes the claims in his preposterous comment.
Common sense: not so common after all...
2
I strongly advise reading the Times piece that debunks the wacko Trumpist claims getting made against the prof before reading some of these comments.
It's right next to this one; a whole clear list of the lies, false claims, hilarious confusions of the time line, massively stupid confusions of different people, and refusals to retract that's firehosing from Trumpists.
4
Lets lay down the real issues to reflect
1. This judge had a teenage drinking problem
2. As an adult he has a gambling problem ( he had huge credit card debts)
3. We know at least once he lied - he said in his hearing that Roe Vs Wade was settled yet his emails state otherwise
4. Now he is accused of sexual assault
After going through 1-3 do you really need to prove or disapprove 4? Just to remind you, we are nominating him to the highest court in the land. Let me also remind you - we are nominating him to the highest court in the land - FOR LIFE!
In ordinary circumstances most reasonable Americans would come to just one conclusion - This man should go!
14
@SridharC
1. Where is there any evidence of a drinking problem?
2. Where is there any evidence of a gambling problem?
3. Where is there any evidence that his credit card debt
had anything to do with gambling? (Almost any
family man with two daughters, a mortgage and
related expenses and who is not "on the take"
probably has had credit card debt, and what is
your definition of "huge"?)
4. He said in recent time that Roe v. Wade is settled law; he said 15 years ago that it was not. 15 years ago it was not settled law, but further cases came along to now judge it as settled law. That is not a lie, but simply different opinions expressed on the basis of more recent evidence, and really speaks to the man's honesty.
Oh, I forgot, evidence doesn't matter to SridharC
1
The current Senate majority represents only 18% of the US population. The people can eat cake. The coup is almost complete.
4
Given their failure/history with the Clarence Thomas confirmation it would be better for all involved if Hatch and Grassley were removed from this confirmation process.
Their recent appearances and comments make it clear they've learned nothing.
12
Look…
The treatment of Dr. Blasey is supremely reprehensible on the part of the GOP for the obvious reasons, but her victimization continues at the hands of the Dems who ARE in fact glomming on to her sexual assault as a political tactic to stall the (obviously malignant) attempt by the GOP to push through a SCOTUS nominee before the midterms.
I find it infuriating that these unconscionable “legislators” find no issue with manipulating the constituency under the guise of altruistic intent.
It's not even the least bit savvy. It's ham fisted.
@Mike P Right on. But the Democrats did accomplish one thing in their bungled effort -- they inadvertently pushed forward this administration's war on whistleblowers. The takeaway: if you have information that you share in confidence, be prepared for a public campaign of humiliation and fear for your life and the life of your family.
Well done!
I nominate Chuck Grassley for "Mansplainer of the Year."
9
Sorry, you get what you vote for.
3
@RNS Which is why a little more than half of Amercians are mortified at the freak show led by our serial liar in chief.
2
@steve I hear you Steve but we're talking about the Senate here. And with the midterms coming up it's a toss up as to which party will control the Senate. Some of you seem satisfied with the way things are. That's the reason for my curt curt remark, you get what you vote for,
Investigate by the FBI; guilty people do not ask the FBI to investigate. Mrs Fords statement about Brett Kavenaugh needs to be investigated by the FBI. Mrs Ford is a respected professional and needs to have her statement verified by the FBI. The country deserves to know the truth. Brett Kavenaugh should welcome an investigation by the FBI so everyone knows he is honest. Mike Davis; Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Grasselry; posted today that Brett Kavenaugh will be confirmed and attacked Mrs Fords attorney. Mike Davis post proves the Republicans are determined to confirm Brett Kavenaugh regardless of the facts. FBI must investigate.
14
@Ray Sipe
But we also know that the Judge LIES -- over and over-- and prevaricates for his own advancement. In this he matches the Republicans on the committee and his friend Mike Davis.
Thanks to little people who have gone power-crazy, such as Mitch and Chuck, the Senate is now as much a world-wide joke as is our Liar In Chief. We need to Clean House come November and elect folks who understand they work for the 1%.
4
Why all the fuss? Just let Emperor Trump fire any and all Justices, including those of the Supreme Court, as he may wish and replace them at will without Senate or any other confirmation . . . What’s that you say, “Unconstitutional!” Pish Tosh, this is not a nation of laws, this is one man rule, get used to it!
1
Here is something that puzzles me to this day. The Senate refused to advance Merrick Garland thus setting the scene for calls of Repub hypocrisy today. I get it. But why didn't President Obama use his political will to make the case for Garland? He could have whipped the left into a frenzy over this (kind of like they are now, but with a more "positive" message - ie. preserve abortion yadda yadda yadda.) Did President Obama not have the stomach it, did he assume Hillary would win and take care of it (even if Republicans kept a majority of Senate). Little bit of both? Looking like a missed opportunity to me. Just sayin' Have a good day
6
@My Aim is True: Obama by now must surely realize how he was used by the Republicans to take down Hillary in 2008.
Brett Kavanaugh's record as a binge drinker is plain for all to see.
He bragged about being in the keg city club and commented “100 kegs or bust” on his high school yearbook page, posted on Twitter by @wusa9.
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/brett-kavanaugh-high-school-...
It is reported that he was a member of a secret society at Yale called Truth and Courage, which had a reputation for drinking and trying to have sex with coeds.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mollyhensleyclancy/the-yale-secret-...
Kavanaugh gave a talk at the Yale Law School Federalist Society in 2014 in which he admitted that while in Yale Law School, he was a binge drinker. The text, all 8 typewritten pages, is available on Twitter as posted by @feliciasonmez.
So we have a pattern: ADMITTED binge drinking in high school, college and law school.
Dr. Ford tells us that Kavanaugh was “stumbling drunk” when he attacked her.
Kavanaugh says he wasn’t there. But if he was bombed, maybe he just can’t remember the party or what he might have done there.
Who do you believe? I believe Dr. Ford.
The FBI should investigate to see who else has any information about this allegation. Then the Senate should hear both sides.
10
She says
He says
Trump opines
Grassley denies
The FBI ? no way no how
Maggie Haberman where art thou?
1
There comes a time when you just have to be mean and hope every conservative Republican in the country that says all this is no big deal have teen-aged daughters.
Can't wait to hear them tell their daughters "too bad, should've said something earlier sweetie!" Hope the preacher tells her that "it's irrelevant" because your accuser may help us save a fetus down the road; not your's, God no, can't have that in the neighborhood!"
7
Put yourself in the position as a possible witness. Were you, (age 50 now) ever at a party 35 years ago when you were 16 or 17 years old where these 2 people were present?
Can a 50 year old hearken back 35 years and remember every party they attended, where they were, and who was at them?? Especially when alcohol was involved?
Think about that. Then perhaps you could understand why these demands for an FBI investigation are completely asinine.
Even if they could, how could any of that testimony be reliable? It cant. Thats why we have a statute of limitations.
8
I think the time has come to petition the Websters Dictionary to include the GOP under the definition of hypocrisy
12
Its telling that the number 1 comment has nothing to do with seeing justice for Ford and everything to do with a political game to prevent the nomination of Kavanaugh. We all know this has nothing to do with justice for an attempted rape that supposedly happened 35 years ago. Everyone knows that Ford is just a pawn of Pelosi and that she is the only shot the Democrats have to prevent Kavanaughs appointment.
Now they just need to line up accusers for the other 20 people on Trumps list and then obstruct their appointments for another 2 years. That will definitely work, right?
9
@Jacqueline, what evidence do you have that Ford (who passed a lie detector test about the attempted rape) has ever met or had anything to do with Pelosi? If you have no such evidence, you are just fabricating that assertion for your own partisan purposes. Deplorable!
1
There is nothing more disgusting and frightening than a Republican Senator, except for the voters that put them there. Graham, "the lady" has a name.
11
To filter out the partisanship, ask yourself this, if this were a Catholic priest to be elevated to the position of a Cardinal and there was a sexual assault allegation, would you want this investigated before he is confirmed? Would it matter if the allegation was 30 years old? You see the defensive justifications melt away.
16
Trump has now corrupted the presidency, the senate and soon the supreme court. The rush on reforming health care, the tax cut and now the mess with nominating an alcoholic frat boy woman abuser, show a president trashing this democracy and a GOP that thinks all of this is fine.
14
@DenisPombriant:How about a faithful husband, great father, great student, great jurist only to be brought down by a 36 year old accusation where the charge was hidden from view by Democrats until couple of days before confirmation?. That doesn't bother you?. Now the accuser doesn't want to accuse under oath? what's wrong with that explanation?. Just remember if they can bring Kavanaught down with this uncorroborated accusation against a jurist that has gone through 6 FBI investigations they can bring anybody down. You want that because he may be a strict constitutionalist?.
2
Sloppy, opaque, underhanded, deaf to the will of the majority of American citizens. That's what Republican governance looks like, I am just so sickened and feel so helpless.
6
"It’s possible that she is misremembering events or even making them up, although it’s hard to see how people could imagine themselves benefiting from doing that." No, it's fairly clear to see a benefit, if she believes that by speaking up she could be saving the country from a supreme court justice that she is fervently opposed to, even for his political opinions alone. Clearly she spoke up from the beginning because she intended to derail his nomination. Her motivation and the truth of what happened is what is unlikely to be discovered here, which she had to be aware of from the start--there is no proof other than a he said-she said. So it seems likely that she knew that she was making an accusation that could not be proven but that she at least knew would sully his reputation and perhaps derail/delay the process, which is perhaps what she was hoping for.
4
Prior to the hearings regarding Judge Kavenaugh, it was difficult for me to imagine the Judiciary Committee behaving in a more shameful manner than it did during the confirmation hearings for Judge Thomas. A lower bar for conduct and fairness was beyond my comprehension. No more. Sens. Grassley and Hatch are directly contradicting themselves when they assert that there is no reason and no precedent for the FBI to re-open the background check of Judge Kavenaugh, which they both thought a reasonable process to undertake during Judge Thomas's hearings. Republicans are denying due process to both Dr. Blasey Ford and Judge Kavenaugh and displaying utter contempt and disregard for Dr. Blasey Ford by having pre-judged the veracity of her allegations without engaging in any fact-finding process. Then there is the question about the need for speed of this particular confirmation process. Any time-table is self-imposed by the Chair of the Judiciary Committee. The Committee and the Majority Leader were content to allow the Supreme Court to operate with 8 justices for well over a year. That they refuse to take a few more weeks for this hearing confirms to me that the Republicans controlling the Senate have completely abrogated their responsibilities as spelled out in the Constitution.
7
It doesn't make sense that the Republicans on the Judiciary committee are stopping an FBI investigation when this has always been the normal procedure and precedent to do follow ups when questions are raised. It is unfair to rush this process when being nominated to the Supreme Court is a life-time appointment and Judge Kavanaugh needs to be fully vetted and the accusation does need to be seriously investigated.
It is not a good faith process to try to make Dr. Ford testify before an investigation is done. If Kavanaugh is innocent he should want the opportunity to clear his name.
7
@Sally
And Judge Kavanaugh will be there on Monday to help clear his name. The FBI had the letter and included it in the background check. If they chose to not further investigate the accusation, then we should respect their decision.
1
Just another example proving that our democracy is dead. Never mind the rule of law. We now have an unrestrained wanna be dictator in the White House. Thanks to the GOP control of the House and the Senate, and the future control of the Supreme Court ..... there will be, not a single check or balance on this President. Just wait, when all of this is in place, President Genius is going to have a field day. Mueller will be fired, and the investigation will be quashed. Then the media will be silenced, with extreme new libel laws. Absolute power is within their reach, and they are determined to get it.
171
There is nothing but fakeness to this fake "originalist" who doesn't admit to the reality that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" means that no legislation can ratify or endorse any faith-based belief.
2
A former FBI agent said on NPR, and John Dean (of Watergate fame) said on CNN yesterday that an FBI investigation could easily be launched into this incident, which would only take a few days. (wonder what else they might unearth in the process??),
This was done for Anita Hill, but it must be ordered by the president, and that is our problem. Because if something should be done, especially for ethical reasons and for full disclosure, we can bet Trump will be against it. It is a knee-jerk reaction for him, which is very interesting psychologically, but terrible for us politically.
The Republicans are increasingly looking like they are petrified to disclose what they already know about Kavanaugh (only 10% of documents have been shared with the Dems) and they certainly don't want to find out anything in Kavanaugh's past to disrupt his nomination. Why? What are they afraid of?
And yes, this has been a spectacle and really poorly handled, especially by the Republicans-- proving once again, they may be good at propaganda, disinformation, lying, obstructing needed legislation, and ignoring the Constitution and human decency, but they are really terrible at governing.
The process is always important in any decision, but obviously the GOP doesn't know or care about that.
Next time, vote for politicians who like government, people, the earth, and fairness, rather than only money, the 1%, and winning by any means necessary and at all costs.
10
@PB
Yes, it was done for Mrs Hill. But even after the FBI said that her allegations were unfounded, they still grilled Justice Thomas. Why go through an investigation, if you're going to ignore the findings?
2
Yes, everyone deserves better than this spectacle. This is a spectacle of a woman accusing someone of inappropriate behavior when they were drunk teenagers in order to derail a Supreme Court nomination.
Literally every teenager in the world has done stuff like this. It is a normal part of growing up.
This is obviously entirely politically motivated and absurd.
5
@No green checkmark:
Whoa.. literally every? Check you bias, No Green.
1
@No green checkmark. Yes you're right. Just about every female teenager has experienced inappropriate behavior, i.e. attempted rape. Does that make it okay??
1
@No green checkmark Totally wrong. Not literally everyone - in fact very few - teenage boys have used force on a girl to obtain sexual contact with her.
4
What's the big rush? Well, of course, we all know what the big rush is about. Even as a 72 year old woman, I remember very well the "wolf pack" behavior of certain teenage boys. Very, very well. And why is Kavanagh being rigorously and powerfully prepped for his testimony while Dr. Blasey can just wait and pound sand? This Senate spectacle is an utter disgrace. It seems that Republicans are sweating bullets to provide American voters with some sort of rationale for putting up with this horrible, very bad, destructive, no good President. I am beyond disgusted.
12
With Les Moonves, the former chairman and CEO of CBS Corporation, it took twelve women to sway the CBS board to finally remove Les Moonves. The testimonies of the first six women mandated a board discussion regarding what is the best option for Les and CBS. When the remaining six women came forth with their accounts regarding Les Moonves, then the board voted for Les' removal.
As in the case of Les Moonves, Harvey Weinstein and other powerful men, one woman's testimony will not equate with Brett Kavanaugh's Republican Senate backers.
4
@minnecal
Ms. Ford has been given the opportunity to testify in private. She accepted, then qualified her acceptance. A fair hearing is all anyone can expect. Our justice system protects both the accuser and accused. However the burden of proof is on the accuser. Ms. Ford must present evidence supporting her accusation. This is the way our system works, and always has. Otherwise we have innocent people in prison with no proof to convict. This is the way the justice system works in say North Korea.
The problem is there is no evidence. I suspect this is why she demanded to remain unidentified.
Ms. Ford can’t remember any details.
I have two close relationships with women who were sexually assaulted. I don’t take this accusation lightly but given the way her situation was handled by people she sought confidence in tells me the democrats are using her for their own political gain. I’m sure she is disillusioned. Especially considering she is a democratic activist. She participated in the women’s march after the election and to have the party she is dedicated to do this to her is unconscionable.
2
"Republicans, who have abused their power by refusing to let their colleagues ... see over 90 percent of the documents relating to Judge Kavanaugh’s critical years in the federal government"?
This isn't democracy in action; it's political thuggery of the worst, most anti-democracy sort.
THAT'S the real issue here, as so often over the last 20 years: the Republicans contempt for democracy, repeated abuses of power and the processes of democracy, and naked grab for power, no matter what it takes.
12
An entitled white boy in an indefensible, drunken assault on a young girl, might have felt, once sober, that he could not stand the shame to himself or his family, if he admitted his crime. If however he had done that and he and his family had suffered the consequences, there is little likelihood that young man would be standing for a Supreme Court seat today. If such a boy had taken the path of courage, character and redemption and become a person of good standing later in life, he would be worthy of universal respect, even if the stain of a stupid, inconsiderate, violent and guilty act, now faded, could never be entirely removed.
If Kavanaugh can credibly be shown to have acted as he has been so accused, there is no choice but to reject his nomination, not by a vote, but out of hand. He would be in every possible way disqualified. The only way to assure that he remains a qualified candidate for this seat is conduct an exhaustive, professional investigation.
If this is not done, members of the Senate who retain a conscience cannot continue to participate in this charade. The only recourse, if the leadership of the Senate insists on moving forward with Kavanaugh's "confirmation" is for those members who retain any sense of honor to refuse to participate any further. The time for rejection of the apparent level of partisanship and cynicism exhibited by the Republican leadership is now and it calls for an all out boycott.
7
Personally, I would have preferred Garland rather than Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, but this editorial is pure ideological boilerplate. This is a Senate confirmation hearing, not a criminal investigation. The accuser absolutely has the right to be heard by the Senate, but she can’t dictate what actions need to be taken. She did not report this for 35 years to law enforcement, but now suddenly wants an FBI investigation, just in time to postpone the nomination hearings until after the elections. Unbelievable, innocent coincidence !
There is no logical reason for the accuser to not talk to the senators. She must think that Kavanaugh does not belong on the Supreme Court bench - then the senators are the ones she needs to address. If her story is compelling, with specific dates, locations, additional names - in other words something that can be reasonably investigated, then after her testimony the senators may very well ask for a law enforcement investigation, to verify her words.
9
It takes a lot of chutzpah to call for an investigation on a charge where the accuser is not willing to state the charges under oath.
The telling evidence that this is a false attack is mounting. Overnight, we learned two important facts: (1) a Democrat official met with the accuser before the accuser put the charges in writing, thereby raising the probability that there is a conspiracy from the start that may have revised or adjusted the story, or how much was disclosed or hidden by the letter; and (2) the accuser is not willing to make her charges under oath, as she could easily do before Monday via the offered deposition to staff in California or on Monday to the Committee and public.
The combination of these two late-breaking developments, combined with the very curious ambiguity of time and place, suggest that whatever happened to the accuser did not involve Judge Kavanaugh at all but, rather, importuned by a Democrat office-holder, the accuser has gone along with a cynical attempt to give red-state Democrats the "cover" to vote against the nominee, without the nominee having to risk perjury charges.
5
It's going to require a voter tsunami of Katrina and Florence proportions combined to put Trump and the ReTrumplicans in their proper place. That can't happen in November, but we can make Nov. 6th the earthquake that triggers the big wave.
3
I wonder if any of us would care to be evaluated based upon our action in High School!
4
Desperation cuts through everything. There is a singular reason for rushing this nomination process; the right wing has had a stated goal of installing a solid majority right wing supreme court for a very long time; decades. That underlies the theft for Gorsuch's seat and the rush job of this nominee through his hearings, ignoring explicit challenges to the nominee's honesty by the Democrats during the hearings. Now, the allegations of an attempted rape committed by the nominee of a 15 year old girl when he was 17, with a friend witnessing the tawdry event, so say the allegations.
What happens to the credibility of the Court, indeed the system of justice, et al, in this nation if the Senate is allowed to continue with this dog and pony sham nomination process, unimpeded.
13
@TJ
That’s a partisan political explanation. The friend (witness) Ms. Ford named denies it ever happened. It will always come down to she said, he said. Because there is no proof. She can present character witnessss. And for every one she presents he can produce as many or more. No help.
I disagree a seat was stolen. It was Joe Biden who came up with the idea Supreme Court nominees should not be put forth in an election year. He was chairman of the Judiciary Committee at the time. Democrats are angry they didn’t get their way then and now are using this woman for vengeance. That’s despicable.
She simply has to prove this happened. Otherwise anyone can accuse anyone else of a crime and someone be convicted simply on the accused’s word.
This situation became emotionally charged by the #metoo movement. That is no reason to jail someone without proof. No matter how repulsive we find an accusation, that’s all it is until proven.
The Supreme Court has been used by democrats to make law they know they cannot get through Congress. That is abuse of power. It’s been 50 years since the Supreme Court has had a reliably constitutionalist majority. The Democratic Party leadership is threatened with the loss of dependence on the Supreme Court to make law they cannot make by representative government. This is why it is extremely important to republicans to get the majority. It will restore constitutional division of power. But democrats will have to operate constitutionally as well.
4
Trump wants Kavanaugh on the court because he believes he will protect him from Mueller. Thats why he doesn't direct the FBI to investigate. He plays it off as if it is the FBI's decision, but we know better. He is laying uncharacteristically low.
He also is pushing Grassley to do the dirty work. The Miranda woman said it "was abuzz," after the party, insinuating there were many more who knew something, Trump knows if these other do pop up, he can then blame Grassley. All this is in Trump's wheel house of MO!
8
The Repiblicans are laying the predicate for the impeachment of Judge Brett Kavanaugh by the "mockery" of the nomination process from Donald Trump's outright lie that the F.B.I. does not do such update background checks to the enabling and toadying Republicans in the Senate. President George H.W. Bush immediately ordered the F.B.I. to investigate the claims raised by Anita Hill in 1991 and reopened the hearings on his nominee Clarence Thomas, which they hurriedly and incompletely finished in just three days. This is what the F.B.I. does with all such nominations; they're highly trained professionals who know how to handle such cases and those questioned are, as we know from Michael Flynn, required to tell the truth or be prosecuted for a crime. But, it is only the accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who is demanding such an investigation; not Donald Trump; not Senate Judiciary Chair Charles Grassley; not Judiciary members, Sens. John Cornyn and Orrin Hatch who've already attacked Dr. Blasey; not Republican women's champion Sen. Susan Collins; and strangely, not even Judge Brett Kavanaugh who should want to clear his name. So, just who is afraid of the truth here? If this is how justice is meted out, how will the American public ever trust the Supreme Court?
8
@Paul Wortman
The irony and immense hypocrisy of The Republican Party here, especially Grassley and Hatch, is that in 1991 at the beginning of the Senate hearings, they gave "self-righteous, pompous" speeches about how before any discussion about the appointment of Clarence Thomas was to proceed that the FBI investigation must be completed and was "the right thing to do". Of course, during those hearings, at every instance, Grassley, especially, went out of his way to demonize Anita Hill.
Now in order to get "their boy" confirmed as quickly as possible, 27 years later, Grassley and Hatch no longer believe FBI investigations of potential lifetime SC choices is important. I guess they forgot that statements they made in 1991 about a similar issue are in the public record for all to see and hear.
This is just another affront to democracy by an arrogant and enabling Republican Party and once and for all, these two 85 and 86 year old "dinosaurs", along with their party, should be purged from government.
Dear NY Times Editorial Board,
May I suggest that perhaps some (if not "the bulk of") of the blame belongs with Senator McConnell and the senators who refused to consider Merrick Garland's candidacy? That the GOP could find reason to stall for a year and never act on his promotion to the Court yet now expect the American people to accept a rush to confirm Brett Kavanaugh beggars their responsibility to us and our children.
Thank you for a fine editorial, Tom Claire
9
Rule no. 1 in America (and in most places): Never speak truth to power, unless you are prepared to be seriously raked over the coals by very, very ruthless people. Going up against this crowd is very stressful and intimidating even for someone presumably very tough and hyper-worldly, like Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels) with a hyper-aggressive lawyer like Michael Avenatti. It's already a much, much worse experience for a quiet college professor. But having made her move, I hope she can carry it through, one way or another.
7
If upon hearing the charge Republicans had said "Fine, let's get the FBI to investigate", the Democrats would've said, "No! She needs to face her violator!" Okay, she can face her violator. "No, we need an FBI investigation!" Whatever. The game is already over; the Court is finally better-balanced. Cow's out of the barn. And stop speaking "for everyone." You don't.
3
@Teller
Investigation is SOP. Anita Hill got it, why not Dr. Ford?
Innocent until proven guilty? Then why doesn't the FBI investigate those who are threatening Dr. Blasey and driving her from the safety of her home?
11
HOW? What is there to investigate? The only other witness doesnt remember anything about that party. I'm sure no one who wasnt sexually assaulted at that party 30 years ago remembers that party. Ford cant even remember where or when the party was or who the hosts were.
The ONLY thing an FBI investigation can do is make time go by. I'm sure that an FBI investigation with no evidence and witnesses can last for 2-3 months. At that point if the Democrats take Congress they can do what? Prevent the nomination of a supreme court justice for 2 more years until Trump is voted out of office? I dont think so. In the end Trump will get two supreme court picks no matter what.
How about the Democrats focus on an amendment to the constitution that gives term limits to supreme court justices instead of this ineffectual attempt at resistance?
4
Lemme get this straight: you view any investigation or opposition as a waste of time, so Democrats should invest instead in a Constitutional amendment?
Was it Casey Stengel or Yogi Berra who wailed, "Don't nobody around here know how this game is played?"
1
The Democrats should be organized in their insistence that this thing be properly investigated. I don't care if they don't have the majority. They have a moral and political responsibility to their constituents, including me, and to the country as a whole -- and to the women of this country who remember what happened to Anita Hill with fury and despair. Hello, Democratic senators. Anybody home?
13
@Round the Bend
How do you propose they investigate? There is no forensic evidence 36 years later, the accuser can’t remember where or when this occurred, there is one eyewitness she claims. He denies it ever happened.
The FBI can interview the three people who, according to Ms. Ford, were there but we already know what she says, what Kavanaugh says, and what Mr. Judge says. What’s the point other than to stall the confirmation process. The constitution gives the senate the responsibility to advise and give consent on these nominations. If there were an investigation it would be theirs to conduct. They are trying but Ms. Ford refuses to testify. In any court of law in the land that results in dismissal of the case.
3
@MikeS
It is about credibility, lie detector, getting other people to testify under oath. Is Mark Judge ready to lie under oath?
Kavanaugh already lied in Senate hearing and it is his credibility on the table.
A strange editorial even by New York Times standards.
Even though you are demanding that the "Truth be told"
you shade your sentences to imply what is simply not there.
It is one thing to recount legal remarks/thoughts from
30 years ago, it is another to recount whether you carried
out a physical assault in a drunken state and/or if you were
assaulted after you had been drinking.
What I find astonishing is no one seems concerned that
parents were, evidently, no where to be seen at this
part of the children of the elites ?
Hold the hearing and see what information arises from it
and take it from there.
3
@John Brown
Then, as now, parties were only held at houses where the parents were away. And in the 70s and 80s, long before the helicopter parenting age, almost all the parents were gone every Saturday night.
And to those tsk-ing over drinking: at my high school, kids stumbled through the halls on quaaludes. Stop the pearl clutching.
2
@John Brown Yes, strange, indeed, Mr. Brown. As a resident of a college town, I can tell you that when parents leave town it's a signal for many teens to party - they usually know where the booze is kept. I saw it in my own neighborhood when I had a teenage son.
Former students from private schools in the area of Georgetown Prep. are speaking out and telling us that it was common for the students to drink a lot, party a lot and hard to tell what else a lot. Another girl has spoken out about being grabbed, thrown against a car and groped by another student - you know, the type of thing that President Trump bragged about. Kavanaugh's friend, Mark Judge, has written about their drinking adventures both in high school and college.
It's cowardly for Mr. Judge and Judge Kavanaugh to lie about these things. Braver men would stand up under oath and admit to their youthful indiscretions.
However, Mr. Judge has said he would not testify. If you watched the Kavanaugh hearings you would know that his relationship to the truth is a bit sketchy.
Draw your own conclusions.
Exactly - that is what I have been saying to anyone on these comment boards who is doubting Dr. Ford's allegations: all the more reason to have a thorough investigation. Why would anyone sho support the Kavanaugh nomination fear that? Well, I guess for the same reason that they support keeping 90% of the documents on the nominee secret. They fear what will come out about the nominee if his background is exposed to the light.
6
Republicans are not focused on being congressman or senators but on keeping power. Power is the force that drives literally everything they do. If Kavanaugh gets selected and it is later proven that he commit attempted rape or the withheld documents show he has written opinions or letters which would have disqualified him, it doesn’t matter to them. America doesn’t matter to Republicans only power. There is no act too unethical for them to pursue that aim.
2
What has been the rush to confirm Kavanaugh? LOL
Anti-labor. Anti-environment. Anti-regulations.
Pro-guns. Pro-money is speech.
Answer: He is a proponent of: Trump can not be indicted while in office.
5
I can imagine not knowing the date of a sexual assault that occurred several decades ago. I do not remember the dates of the sexual assaults I have endured. I can understand why Dr. Ford came forward with this allegation now...perhaps she thought she could move past the assault and that it would never become a renewed issue in her life and then felt a moral duty to come forward once Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court.
I was in a relationship during law school that was characterized by repeated physical, verbal, and sexual assault and death threats and threats to ruin my reputation by a man who also attended my law school back in 2010-2011. My therapist advised me at the time to write down my account in case this power-seeking man ended up running for or in a position of power in the future. I told my friends about it at the time and other students in the law school were aware of his behavior. I received a restraining order against this man. He still threatened me thereafter.
Somehow, since then, he has managed to become an attorney for a state government, nonetheless. While writing this comment I looked him up online and he recently been elected to a position of power. I am disgusted and sick to my stomach and scared.
11
The party in power is demonstrating it's inability to get beyond partisan bickering for the sake of an ordered investigation of a serious allegation against a SCOTUS nominee. Literally nothing has changed since the Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill fiasco unmasked the Senate as nothing more than partisan politicians. The thing that has changed is the mobilization of women around this very issue. The Republican Judiciary All Male Boys Choir is about ready to experience the consequences of bad behavior towards Professor Ford. They need to step back, slow down and conduct themselves as their old moniker would dictate..... "The world's greatest deliberative body" .... Otherwise they should be stripped of the title.
8
If Dr. Blasey is lying, why in the world would she include a third person in her lie who was at the scene? And the third person being Kavanaugh’s friend?
Any prosecutor or defense attorney, as well as professional assault counselors would tell you that is not how a person telling a lie would set up a story. To include a witness who would protect the accused.
11
@Cruzio
Except the witness denies the truth of her story and will if subpoenaed.
This will always come back to she said, he said. Because it cannot be proven. Ms. Ford is being used as a pawn in a political game by democrats. That’s all that can be proven.
1
@Cruzio Could it be that the "witness" wrote a book where he described his time in high school as being drunk all of the time? It would further her claim that Judge Kavanaugh was drunk at the time.
1
If Dr. Blasey is receiving death threats, as she is, doesn't the FBI NEED to be investigating?
And can local law enforcement officers request FBI involvement if they believe these threats are out of their jurisdiction?
It cannot be -- can it? -- that the safety of Americans is dependent on the whims of President Trump.
274
Does this new standard apply to all future appointments to high office? Thirty-year old accusations about behavior by teenagers toward other teenagers, as the basis for vetting for high office, could really spiral out of control.
This is especially true if grown-up former teenagers realize that they can spike/delay appointments of political rivals by going public with what happened, or might have possibly happened, or even with unfounded allegations about what happened, thirty-plus years ago.
The New York Times is setting an exceedingly high standard of behavior. Would this new standard be applied to its own senior executives in all future promotions? Can anyone in a senior position at e.g., the New York Times at the moment be harassed by any political rival who knew them at age 17? Are senior executives exempt? Who is exempt and who is not? All senior political offices will need to be filled by individuals who were never teenagers, and who never even knew any teenagers.
I do not think this proposed standard can feasibly work.
6
@Peter Johnson. From your post, are we to suppose that no teenager ever committed a crime? or experienced or attempted a rape. Yes, teenagers do stupid things. however, attempted rape, in my opinion, is not just a stupid thing.
3
@cecilia
A teenage boy pushing a teenage girl down on to a bed at a party is now called attempted rape? If a teenage boy pushes another teenage boy as they pass in the hall, is that attempted murder? Everyone needs to take a deep breath and see how ridiculous this situation has become.
Another reason to have the FBI investigate the matter are the threats themselves. There is no way to know how credible they are until and unless the FBI pursues the matter. Some individuals apparently believe that their strong arm tactics are justified as long as they occur under the cover of darkness. Let's see how brave they are in the light of day with their anonymity removed and their threats revealed.
13
@DB: The FBI can investigate these death threats as witness tampering. They don't need permission from the White House to do so.
2
@DB
My daughter wast attacked 30 years ago in daycare . The 6 year old brute thinks he got away with it.
He'll know better after I report him to the police
2
@DB That would be a separate investigation that should start with the local law enforcement.
"Whatever becomes of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s process for considering him has been a mockery from the start — a mockery of lawmakers’ constitutional responsibility and of the ideal that the court should be anything more than a political trophy."
Any mockery of the system by which we select our SCOTUS judges began two years ago with Mitch McConnell's refusal to carry out his Constitutional duty to provide advice and consent Mr. Obama's nominee to the court.
The man has abrogated his Constitutional duties repeatedly since he became that body's leader. We, the people of the United States of America, should expect more from our governing bodies. Yet, with the Senate of Mitch McConnell, why should we expect that a committee within his Senate to behave any differently?
27
@PGJ
You lost the election. Get over it
1
"What matters" so far is why Judge Kavanaugh hasn't urged the Judiciary Committee to hold its vote until a reasonable investigation of the sexual abuse claim against him has been completed. Among his most important duties as a judge (and future Supreme Court Justice) is to render decisions on due process issues. Arguably, every case before the high court at its core is about due process. Kavanaugh's silence suggests he will give due process short shrift as a Justice. It also undoubtedly encourages a surmise that he has something to hide. And for understandable reasons. Indeed, were the charges against him to lead to his rejection by Congress, he'd be at risk of having to relinquish his judgeship on the D.C. Circuit and to experience the disintegration of his family. To be or not to be...
21
With the hijacking of Antonin Scalia's vacancy by the Republicans, they clearly established a take-no-prisoners approach to Supreme Court nominees, and are now desperate to get Kavanaugh approved before they possibly lose control of the Senate. Please do not be shocked if they tank over any remaining observance of protocol. They know that if they are in the minority at any time in the Senate, with a Republican president, and a vacancy occurs, the Democrats will deny them that seat. That is the spectacle that will live on and they, and only they are to blame.
15
I don't think Dr Ford would have come forward if just groping was involved, as described by some media accounts. Laying on top of someone and tearing at their clothes is over the top even for teenage boys. And there has to be more on her mind - more to the story. So many Americans are dismissed by the GOP because of color, economic condition or medical needs, for instance. Every one needs to be respected. If Kavanagh was a responsible man, he would tell the truth. We need responsible leadership that respects everyone, which is not the case now.
25
@Barbara Snider
So you think that if teenage boys make a mistake, they should be doomed for life.
Throw them in jail and forget about them
1
What is the huge rush? The midterms are about 30 days away, the installation of those elected on November 6th, not until Jan. 3, 2019. The current Senate membership will not change until Jan. 3, 2019, or the composition of the Judiciary Committee. There is ample time for the Republicans to rubber stamp their nominee between now and then. But at what price for the integrity of the judicial review process, for the reputation of the Senate, for Judge Kavanaugh, and for the Supreme Court? Ms. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh and the country deserve a fair, objective hearing based on adequate information and testimony from appropriate witness, not a rush job that blatantly serves the political interests of one party.
34
I wonder this also but heard that the Oct. Supreme Court contains many landmark cases that the few need to cement their right wing coup. They do not want more ties. Evil lives on.
1
@BC The Supreme Court term starts October 1. The months-long investigation and week-long hearing into Brett Kavanaugh's appropriateness for the job have been completed. All that remains is the voting.
If Christine Ford wants to testify as to his character, she has been invited to do so. A special exception was made for her, and she can do it as she sees fit. But she wants an investigation made, which she has no right to demand. The Senate Judiciary Committee and the FBI have no business investigating a claim of attempted rape 36 years ago.
If Christine Ford wants law enforcement to investigate her claim, she should file a criminal complaint in Maryland and start that process going. She has chosen not to, as is her right. But that is her choice, and she has to live with it.
3
To the contrary, the bulk of the blame goes to Mitch McConnell, for unabashedly refusing to discharge his constitutional obligation to have the senate give its "advice and consent" on the nomination of Judge Garland to the Supreme Court. Had that happened, there would be no Kavanaugh nomination right now. Recall that initially upon Garland's nomination, Chuck Grassley indicated that a confirmation hearing would be convened.......until McConnell said that the nomination would not even be considered. McConnell said that "the people should decide". That's not what our Constitution prescribes. McConnell suspected (with good reason) that Garland couldn't be voted down after his virtual unanimous confirmation to the D.C. Circuit. Grassley is no angel, but McConnell runs the show and merits the bulk of the blame.
139
The Supreme Court's integrity is at stake. There can be no doubt about this.
"What matters is that Dr. Blasey has made a serious, specific and credible allegation."
There is a (slim) chance to fix this.
Additionally, why does it stand that Senator Grassley has withheld 90 percent of the documents from the American people?
14
Calling for the FBI to investigate is nothing but street theater, since the WH will not request it. Not at this point. They need to be forced to, and only strong testimony by Dr Blasey -- on national TV -- has any chance of forcing their hand. (Save maybe some new evidence being introduced).
This is frustrating because it sure seems like Dr Blasey has been given bad advice all through this. Once the letter was produced it was sure to be leaked. Someone should have told her that, and helped her to produce and execute a game plan. She needed a well-funded team behind her from that point on.
Imagine if the situation were reversed, and the Republicans had this bomb in their hands? Their whole infrastructure would have been mobilized to investigate, find witnesses, prepare the ground for battle.
In this version of reality, the Democrats could have gotten their "head shot" (as Bannon, the broken clock, was right about). Now, one worries that Dr Blasey will get the worst of both worlds: a lifetime of harassment, and her assaulter on the Supreme Court.
6
@Duncan
You blame Dr Ford for the country not having a decent process in place to investigate this kind of accusations?
Yoy expected her to be the shrewd political activist?
Kavanaugh disqualified himself with his "misleading statements, about his role in several high-profile actions taken by the George W. Bush administration."
If he did that in an open hearing, what should we worry about in the rest of his papers that won't be released?
Why the rush for a life-time appointment?
25
If the committee does not request that the FBI re-open its investigation of Judge Kavanaugh' s and delay a confirmation vote, Dr. Blasey Ford should testify on Monday. Otherwise the GOP will vilify her as a liar unwilling to stand up to examination in public. Democrats should not allow this to happen. Concerned citizens should email their senators to make sure that Dr. Blasey Ford will testify before the committee.
5
The Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee are unfortunately making a mockery of their solemn duty to thoughtfully evaluate Kavanaugh's nomination. It is clear that their mindset, starting with the chairman, Senator Grassley, is a rush to judgment (i.e., confirmation). A fair and impartial consideration of Ms. Ford's accusations is warranted. Suppose Ms. Ford's accusations are accurate but she is not heard or her testimony is only perfunctorily considered. The Supreme Court will then have two of nine members accused of sexual misconduct. This is not a sound foundation for many issues likely to rise to the Court's consideration.
10
Depending on how badly this plays, and we can be certain that it will be bad, retaliation may prove more important than this confirmation. Kavanaugh is almost certain to be the second male Justice with sexual black marks attached to him personally. Add to that the sleazy way the GOP handled the entire court-packing effort, and ask yourself, what happens next?
It's possible that a future government ruled solely by Democrats will simply pack the court in their favor. After all, the conservative court we've had for nearly 50 years was the luck of the draw until Senator McConnell decided to intervene to keep it that way indefinitely. They drew first blood, They may be the last to bleed.
6
Dr. Blasey's account is certainly more credible than the denial by Blackout Brett and comatose sidekick Judge who won't deny but only say he "doesn't remember." Sure, that makes sense.
This is a transparent act on the part of the running-scared GOP; they are willingly perverting the underlying assumptions of the Constitution to cling to a shred of unwarranted, purloined power. Characters like Graham seriously need a spinal transplant to discharge their constitutional duties.
The GOP may slam through Kavanaugh...and they will pay for it at the polls. Their performance will clear the way for a Kavanaugh impeachment within just a few court cycles. He has lied and, if approved, will be removed.
22
It is ludicrous for the Editorial Board to suggest, in some bizarre both sides effort, that Ms. Ford could be making up this event. I might not remember all of the details but I certainly remember every instance in which I was groped or assaulted by a man, including by my eye doctor. Did I tell someone when when it happened? Not always - for many reasons which have to do with being a teenage girl and your place in the world. But 35 years later, that trauma is still just below the surface.
For me, this reinforces my sense of Judge Kavanaugh as a morally challenged person of questionable character, who was selected to advance a specific political agenda. Someone who is willing to sacrifice his integrity and lie under oath to advance his career does not deserve elevation to the highest court in the land.
14
The character of the Senate Republicans shows them to be meaner than their predecessors from 1991. They learned nothing from Anita Hill hearings. The US rot extends from a flawed Senate pushing through a flawed justice.
13
Need to start with the two of them at the Senate hearing.
Stop the vote for an event happening more than 30 years ago with no credible evidence beyond reshaped distant memory and the accuser a Feinstein Lenin's Bay Area constituent who is still in the process of putting the "real" story together--therapist's 2012 notes about the event inaccurate?
American people need to see how credible Ford is and how believable the "high school party" story she tells from so many years ago.
2
@Alice's Restaurant perhaps if you read the companion article, "Why Sexual Assault Memories Stick
Christine Blasey Ford says she has a vivid memory of an attack that took place when she was 15. That makes sense.
Richard A. Friedman
By Richard A. Friedman
Dr. Friedman is a psychiatrist."
you may learn something regarding memory; whether it be three hours or three decades for a traumatic experience.
1
@Alice's Restaurant Need to start with a real investigation - even Anita Hill got that. And only someone who is mired in right wing propaganda, along with all the attendant mysogyny and sex abuse excusing, would say the Dr. Ford's allegation lack credibility.
2
How many of the republican senators on the judiciary committee are up for reelection this year. and are the from safe states?
4
Anti-Kavanaughts can't have it both ways. If they insist on having Ms. Ford's allegations treated like a criminal complaint which requires a full investigation, discovery, etc. then Judge Kavanaugh should be given the protections of a criminal defendant, i.e. presumed innocent. On the other hand, if those who oppose Judge Kavanaugh's nomination refuse to presume that he is innocent because he is not actually a criminal defendant, then they cannot insist on a full criminal investigation.
But enough posturing from both sides. Let's cut to the chase. In all likelihood, Ms. Ford (understandably) will not testify without a full investigation, the Senate will go ahead with the nomination vote anyway, Judge Kavanaugh will be confirmed and Democrats will have another campaign issue (as if they need any more such issues) to rally around.
As far as the Supreme Court itself is concerned Judge Kavanaugh's apppointment will simply mean that instead of having one Justice (Thomas) whose appointment was tainted there will be two such Justices, and the reputation of the Supreme Court Justices, instead of being mostly sunny, will always be partly cloudy.
26
@Jay Orchard
Because of Republican’s disregard for the truth and other mistakes Liberals already have it both ways.
It they ram it through they will add to the democratic enthusiam to show up in November. If they postpone it for 2-3 weeks to allow for the investigation they will lose Kavanaugh. It is easy win-win for liberals.
7
@Jay Orchard Guilty people do not ask the FBI to investigate them.Mrs Fords statement about Brett Kavenaugh needs to be investigated by the FBI. Mrs Ford is a respected professional and needs to have her statement verified by the FBI. The country deserves to know the truth. Brett Kavenaugh should welcome an investigation by the FBI so everyone knows he is honest. Mike Davis; Chief Counsel for Nominations for Senator Grasselry; posted today that Brett Kavenaugh will be confirmed and attacked Mrs Fords attorney. Mike Davis post proves the Republicans are determined to confirm Brett Kavenaugh regardless of the facts. FBI must investigate.
3
@CarolinaJoe The Republicans dug their own bed when they threw out the rule book in 2016 and decided to wage a political dirty war.
All we're asking is that we follow precedent: a thorough FBI investigation followed by an open inquest.
“This has been a drive-by shooting when it comes to Kavanaugh,” Senator Lindsey Graham told reporters on Tuesday, giving the cynical game away in one compact statement. “I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close.”
Women of America, this is what the GOP thinks of any objection you may have to sexual assault. Frankly, they see it as something that is not worth considering. Yes, they claim they will listen, but it won't have any impact on their plan to confirm the male Supreme Court Nominee. After all, this approval of sexual assault on women is headed by the President has bragged about his own campaign to sexually assault women.
43
This is what needs to be asked of Kavanaugh if the hearing goes forward:
1 What was the youth culture at Georgetown Prep in terms of drinking and “partying”?
2 If students drank to excess, and we have plenty of evidence of that, did you on occasion drink to excess?
3 You were a very popular member of the student body. Do you maintain that you never drank to excess?
4 Even if it was only one time that you drank to excess, are you aware that teenagers who drink to excess can do things that they afterward cannot remember? Is this what happened with Dr. Ford?
5 Lastly, you issued a flat public denial that you were not even at the party at which Dr. Ford claims you assaulted her. Since she has not furnished either a date or a location of this party, how can you possibly determine which particularly party you are adamant that you did not attend?
44
@Jim Baughman
Even if he drank to excess it does not mean that he did what he is accused of.
@Favs
Then instead of "she-said, he-said" we would have "she-said, he said he might have because he was too drunk to remember".
A very different ballgame would ensue. A blackout due to drunkeness does not excuse or even mitigate lawless behavior.
Also, how do you explain his denying having been at the party where this assault allegedly happened, when no time or location has been established?
“I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close,” Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) said this week.
It’s statements like these that are flippant and disrespectful that show the lack of care given to assigning this powerful lifetime appointment.
39
The Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee know exactly what they are doing. They want Kavanaugh confirmed and are willing to pay the political price to achieve this lifetime appointment. Check out Nancy MacLean's "Democracy in Chains" if you want to see where this comes from and where it's headed. Another relevant read is David Brock's recent piece on the nbcnews.com site. He's a contemporary of Kavanaugh who was enlisted to smear Anita Hill when she was stuck in the barrel.
3
"I'll listen to the lady...." The only thing more demeaning would have been if he said "the little lady". How can Senator Collins or any other senator that respects the rights of women and our democracy abide by this travesty of on the part of these Republicans and still sleep at night.
Dirty politics leads to more dirty politics. The next step may be for a future Democratic Administration and Congress to increase the number of justices, as FDR threatened to do, in order to have their majority. It goes on and on. There is a reason that people in government need to compromise, abide by customs and respect each other.
3
I am no fan of Kavanaugh's, but I think that when you are 17 you are a different person so this old story, while illuminating should not derail confirmation. What should derail confirmation is if Kavanaugh lied about it. And I think he did lie about it. That is what is key. And that is why it should be investigated.
49
@Ruthless1
Investigated? How?
Should the FBI start tracking down his classmates? Ask them if they were at a party 35 years ago, and if Ford was at the same party? Do you really think a 50 year old is going to be able to remember every party they went to, where they were, and who was there?? When they were 16??
@Ruthless1
We need spotless people on SC, period. Not be able to have a single honest, decent and spotless candidate tells you something about American Conservatism.
6
@Ruthless1 Let us argue he did it. The allegation is that he was drunk. How can you prove that he remembers what happened when he was drunk?
1
And why is it that the party that claims "moral and ethical superiority" and their followers, always resort to threats of violence or actual acts of violence, when things aren't going their way?
24
Which story, or stories, of Dr. Ford should be investigated first?
She doesn't remember the date, or the location, or who was there, and anyone even tangentially connected to her or Kavanaugh solidly denies what she says.
If there's a big check waiting for her, of course, I'm sure it will be honored at the bank anyway. The political Dems do pay well, with hired protestors good for $1500 a week. Stopping a SCOTUS nominee and trashing the Senate has got to be worth half a million at least.
The Democrats got this going out of sheer desperation, and now it is blowing up in their collective faces. Could this party even organize a two-car funeral?
3
@L'osservatore
Your argument is weak tea.
Ford mentioned this incident years ago. She passed an FBI-administered test. The rest is your partisan speculation.
2
@L'osservatore
I'm guessing you've never been sexually assaulted. I have, and while everyone deals with trauma differently, my way was to try and completely block it out of my mind. In doing so, many of the finer details from something that happened to me in high school (nearly 40 years ago) are quite fuzzy, but I can still tell you who the perpetrator was. That, sadly, will probably never go away. Dr. Ford appears to be a smart, educated, successful and level-headed woman. Why would she willingly open this current situation (you know, like death-threats and her life being turned upside down and inside out) if it were not true? As to her waiting so long to come forward, no doubt she knew what was in store for her and exercised caution about when/how and even IF she would. I can only hope that the guy who assaulted me has turned out to be a respectable and respectful man, and sometimes I actually do wonder what became of him and if he did this to anyone else, but I choose not to dredge it up at this time. However, if he suddenly became a nominee for the highest court, I, too, might rethink keeping this "secret" to myself, as there are far greater consequences of allowing someone who showed no regard/respect for me to make decisions that affect all women in this country.
4
@L'osservatore This one, at least, doesn't come from Moscow. Only an American could so well express the way Republicans think.
Kavannaugh seemed squeaky clean as he was rolled out in front of the public complete with commercials championing his heroic credentials. Behind the scenes we heard McConnell was concerned that he would be difficult to get through the process. They buried documents, but as it turns out, he has a not-so-squeaky clean past of obfuscation and gambling issues. This is our country and this is what is what's it's become? For what purpose? Kamila Harris asked him a question about his "conversation" with someone at Kasowitz et all Law Firm. If you did't see his face as he struggled to find a response, you'd think he hadn't completely heard her question. It's so obvious. He is not a truthful man. You can't fool me. Apparently, you can fool everyone in the Republican Party. Democracy is slipping away while we watch this baloney. Dr. Ford was assaulted by an out-of-control teenaged Kavanaugh. No. Not all young men are like this. Just out-of-control, power-hungry liars.
21
All of the hysteria around Ford's allegation (which has neither a year or a place attached and the alleged parties and witnesses have denied), reminds me of the hysteria around the withdrawal from the Paris climate accord. Actually, the hysteria around the climate accord withdrawal was much worse . . . predictions of apocalyptic catastrophe from the left, including the NYT, were off the charts in outrage. Now pretty much, the Paris accord has been forgotten but for an anemic "world" conference in San Francisco lost week whereby a few politico's patted themselves on the back.
Same here with the Ford allegations. If Ford was serious, she would go under oath and make her claims. I doubt that will happen. And this will be in the rear view mirror faster than the Paris climate withdrawal . . . do you remember that?
6
Oh, we remember, all right. And to quote good old Frodo, "I won't forget. But I may forgive."
1
@pjm Yes, I remember the withdrawal by Trump from the Paris Climate Accord as does the rest of the world. Close to 100% of scientists are warning us that the effects of climate change are real and 70% of Americans agree that the effects are real and will harm future generations. Right now, glaciers are melting, storms intensifying, seas rising and acidifying, and you are ill informed.
And as a retired mental health counselor who has heard many stories about sexual harassment and assault, Dr. Blasey's account sounds very credible to me. She has nothing to gain personally and much to lose, as already evident, and I commend her for her willingness to come forward.
1
This is not about allegations of serious misconduct made by a professor of clinical psychology against a federal judge. This is about the politicized use of allegations made by one teenager against another--many decades too late for the authorities to have done anything about it or, for that matter, even to have informed the parents of the kids involved--which should have been the first step, well before the Senate got itself tangled up in it. This editorial and the predictable Charles Blow bit would not have been written if the accuser came forward to say how mistreated she was by a liberal judge--whether last year or in high school. Whatever might have happened to her in high school, Dr. Blasey Ford is now being used by liberal Democrats for the political purposes advocated (directly or by implication) by this editorial and similar pieces; her reluctance to testify could be due to her awareness of that.
6
Of course Ms. Blasey Ford wants the FBI to investigate before she testifies--so she can learn details of what may have happened since she seems to have forgotten most of them. If she had been able to find corroboration I'm sure the parties' names would have been leaked to the media and they would be on all the talk shows.
Without corroboration Ms. Blasey Ford's allegations become a she says-he says dispute based on the memory of someone who is unable to recall such basic facts as the day, month, year or city in which the alleged incident took place; in whose house the alleged incident occurred; whether 2 or 4 boys were present; and how she got to/from the house where the alleged attack took place.
In the U.S. anyone accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Ms. Blasey Ford has had 35 years in which to file a civil or criminal case against Mr. Kavanaugh, but has not done so. She had 35 years to share her story with the media but did not.
Yet suddenly her allegations have been raised just in time to try to derail the confirmation of Mr. Kavanaugh, which suggests an underlying political motivation.
Surely anyone with a modicum of intelligence understands that the timing and circumstances of this long-delayed accusation indicate that this is political theater rather than a search for justice.
We Democrats lost the 2016 Presidential election, too bad, now let's turn our energies and talents to ensuring that we win the mid-term and 2020 elections.
19
@Ro Ma
I could not agree more with your post here.
These decades old very vague (at best), uncorroborated accusations can never be "resolved".
or factually verified. The entire episode, and the timing just feels wrong....
1
@Ro Ma It's tough to determine your position on women's issues from your post, but it is easy to determine that women's issues are at least one issue that clearly isn't on your radar.
Bottom line: If you want to control women's -- a woman's body -- you might start with your own, whichever is your sex.
@Ro Ma
Why not use "the modicum of intelligence" you speak of to know that this is not a criminal trial, it is a citizen speaking up to her experience of someone who wants to be a SC justice. Her allegations could easily be looked into by the FBI, which is the proper channel as it was in the Anita Hill case and that took 3 days.
If Trump and Grassley's bunch had any interest in the Truth they would be looking for it.
1
The subtitle of this Editorial begins: "Forget the political finger pointing."
The second paragraph of the editorial is:
"The bulk of the blame lies with Senator Chuck Grassley, the committee chairman, and his fellow Republicans, who have abused their power by refusing to let their colleagues and the American people see over 90 percent of the documents relating to Judge Kavanaugh’s critical years in the federal government. "
That sure sounds like fingerpointing to me.
17
I'd like to hear more about the $200,000+ debt that the judge ran up for "sports tickets". Who buys that many tickets? Who paid the debt? Who holds a marker against Kavanaugh?
132
The first step of this editorial should be to describe what this "investigation" should look like. Dr Ford has provided no dates, no corroborating witnesses and no specific location to an event that occurred more than 30 years ago. Additionally, some of the details she has provided have changed. That is not a judgement of their veracity, its simply a statement of the present situation.
What the Republicans did to Merrick Garland was reprehensible. The Mueller investigation is not a witch hunt, it is occurring based upon facts and evidence in addition to allegations. The standard that a single, uncorroborated allegation can derail a political appointment is extremely dangerous and completely unrelated to the previous two facts, because this WOULD be a witch hunt.
I have yet to see any coherent argument as to what benefit an investigation or testimony will provide other than to reveal whether Kavanaugh or Ford has a better public speaking coach. I would love for The Editorial Board, or any other supporter of this course of action, to generate one.
13
@Toby
Your question is based in false assertions meant to cause inference of things not true. The Editorial should not describe what the investigation should look like nor should Sen Grassley or anyone who is not a professional sex crimes investigator even attempt to describe what the investigation would look like.
I read the story Ms Blasey gave Emma Brown and there is plenty of detail about the assault and the party etc to go on. There is also the multiple answers Mr Judge the other boy who helped lock her in the room has given to being asked about these events. The truth does not change, his answers have.
9
@Toby
A proper investigation of a credible accusation would get statements by trained investigators under oath and the penalty of perjury. There was a purported witness IN THE ROOM during the assault. Others are now saying they knew something of this encounter. Get their sworn statements. Run down additional leads as appropriate and write a report including the facts and statements they've uncovered. The Federal Bureau of INVESTIGATION (FBI) has trained INVESTIGATORS and knows how to do this. As usual, Trump either has no idea what the FBI does or is lying out of self interest.
The Anita Hill allegations were swept under the rug after a rushed, 3 day FBI investigation. Orrin Hatch, yes that Orrin Hatch, had insisted on FBI involvement at the time. Multiple corroborating witnesses were standing by but not allowed to testify at her hearing. Recordings of that hearing are cringeworthy by today's standards. The all white male panel couldn't have done a worse job of questioning her and Clarence Thomas. Botching that allowed Clarence Thomas to barely get on the court.
Kavanaugh isn't entitled to serve on the court. He's sitting for a job interview in front of the American people. So far, it looks more like an interview to join a mens only country club.
5
If Brett Kavanaugh is seated on the Supreme Court, he will undoubtedly rule on cases involving women’s rights as full citizens. Why should the public believe he has any integrity if his nomination and confirmation process is rushed and flawed?
The latest allegations are extremely serious and quite plausible. There is little incentive for his accuser to lie, and it’s quite apparent that debauchery was widely known to take place at Georgetown Prep. Kavanyhas publicly stated his relief that ‘what happens’ at his old school, ‘stays’ there, and that’s fortunate for him. His close friend and fellow alcoholic, Mark Judge wrote a book about his high school experiences and made other troubling statements.
It’s obvious why Senate Republicans want to rush the process. Winning this open seat is the holy grail. They’ve used muscle and deceit to get here. Winning is more important than due process, integrity, honesty, or the country they profess to love. If Brett, a lifelong conservative warrior, shares those values, then he would certainly lie to win and happily participate in a sham.
Brett Kavanaugh’s integrity is no better than that of Donald Trump, Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, or Mitch McConnell. Why shouldn’t he join Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch on the Supremes. The majority of Americans, especially women, can then despise the court as much as they despise the current President and Congress.
The blue wave may we’ll become a tsunami.
65
@Michael Tyndall
'Kavanaugh has' rather than 'Kavanyhas', and 'well' rather than 'we’ll'. Damn 'autocorrect' or the lack thereof.
During the Reagan Administration, SC nominee Douglas Ginsburg was deemed disqualified because of his previous use of marijuana. Nixon’s nominee, Clement Haynsworth, was rejected for seeming to favor segregation and being “reflexively anti-labor.” G.W. Bush’s 2005 nominee, Harriet Miers, was disqualified because she had once allowed her law license to expire. Obama’s 2016 nominee, Merrick Garland, was rejected by the U.S. Senate because he was nominated by Obama.
That Republicans would plow ahead with the Kavanaugh confirmation defies all reason. That they reflexively dismiss Ford’s story doesn’t surprise me at all, but it truly angers me.
Dr. Ford came forward knowing the controversy and anger her accusation would engender. She was forced to choose between the impact on her family, her reputation, her entire life versus her sense of responsibility - her awareness of one's obligations to our country.
The Senate must respect that choice. Judge Kavanaugh is not the only conservative judge they could vet. He is just the only one that believes that a sitting president is above the law.
197
I don't believe the obscene rush to put Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court has anything to do with Republicans fearing the slim possibility they will lose control of the Senate.
The reality almost certainly is that Republicans and Trump will have through December 2018 to put an ideological clone of Kavanaugh on the court. So why this travesty?
Because they can. Because they no longer bother to even pretend that the judiciary should serve any purpose or agenda other than that of their own choosing, or that they have a constitutional duty to serve as a check on the presidency, or even that the rule of law represents something more significant than an empty phrase or meaningless campaign slogan.
44
Next time, win the election. The sad part is that the way the Democrats are acting, they are giving a gift to the Republicans in November. They come across as obstructionist--which is exactly what they are doing.
18
@Independent
Stopping liar and alleged attempted rape suspect to become SC Justice is always the right thing to do. No elections required.
1
@Independent Democrat Barack Obama won the presidency in 2012. What do you call what Senate Republicans did to Merrick Garland?
1
@CarolinaJoe And the way to do that is to win elections. Next time, don't undermine your own candidate and try and get voter participation above 55%. Crying over spilt milk won't get you very far.
Today a complaint against Kavanaugh was sent certified mail to the DC Bar. The complaint cited published letters to the editor by Sen Patrick Leahy, Ms. Lisa Graves, and former Sen Russ Feingold. The information supplied by these three members of the legal profession cited repeated false statements uttered under oath by Kavanaugh during his previous confirmation hearing for the DC court of appeals, the position he now holds.
The complaint should lead to an investigation of Kavanaugh's false statements and if it finds that he provided perjured testimony he may lead to his disbarment, whereupon he will not be allowed to hold any position on the judiciary.
An investigation into Kavanaugh's alleged false sworn statements may have already been commenced, however, today's complaint was sent to ensure that those allegations will be investigated.
173
@Alabama Do you have a link, please?
No one expects the FBI investigation to reveal anything conclusive. There were three people in the room. Two can credibly claim to have no memory of the event. I don't know if that statement would be true but the statement is plausible. We have no way of contradicting that defense. We can discuss teenage alcoholism after the fact. There are two very good reasons we need to wait for the FBI though.
First, the FBI has the potential to at least corroborate the context of Dr. Blasey's accusations. If you talk to enough people, the FBI should be able to figure out roughly which party, when, and where. The FBI's job is to establish context.
Second, we need Kavanaugh to answer to the FBI before testifying before Congress. The FBI might ask Kavanaugh some questions the Republican Congress would rather not have answered. I think conservatives are afraid Kavanaugh can't credibly deny the accusation even assuming blackout inebriation. If he doesn't have Grassley to lob questions at him, Kavanaugh is going to publicly perjure himself.
33
@Andy
And using lie detector for Kavanaugh would be helpful too.
@Andy
"No one expects the FBI investigation to reveal anything conclusive."
Who are you to speak for everyone?
For the life of me, I cannot understand why the Senate leadership will not allow an FBI investigation to take place. It makes no sense not to take a few more days to make a better assessment of Kavanaugh's actions, and his statements concerning those actions. Christine Blasey Ford's accusations show a man with a lack of character that we should not allow on the Supreme Court. What's the rush?
181
@Patrick Stevens
It is possible that the Senate feels that it is in a race against time with the Mueller investigation, nobody knows when the findings will come to light but that will not matter if they get Kavanaugh elected first because he will quash any convictions arising from it-that is even if it reaches that stage because the Attorney General will be replaced with a tame one of trumps choosing whose only priority will be to end the work (and probably the career) of Robert Mueller thereby letting everybody off the hook.
This is trumps Grand plan, if he is allowed to succeed there will be no stopping him and then God help America.
8
@Patrick Stevens Perhaps Senator Grassley and his cohorts know more about Brett Kavanaugh than they have thus far revealed.
6
@Patrick Stevens
I think that the president has the sole authority to request an FBI investigation as part of another background check into Kavanaugh. No federal crime has been committed so the FBI will not take on this case. Neither Senate (I think) does not have the authority to request an FBI investigation and certainly Dr Ford does not have the authority.
1
How many Constitutional values have gone by the wayside since Trump took his oath. Well, for one, truth. Then there's the assurance that the Constitution would be carried out using its brilliant design of Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances. Is the McConnell and Ryan leadership in the Congress even aware this exists? No, so far it's been trade offs and lack of interest in what the Administration is doing. Tariffs, a tax that is supposed to be imposed by Congress? No, abdicated to the President to misinterpret what truly is national security.
Now it's advise and consent. Or as Senator Grassley interprets it, cheer leading and cover up. Arbitrary deadlines are set, no attempt to provide adequate information about the candidate's prior governmental, conduct. And now, as Candidate for a life time appointment Kavanaugh put it in a 2015 talk: What happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep.
43
@Michael Kelly McConnell un-constitutionally interpreted the Senate's power to "Advise and Consent" as power to deny and reject. An act of TREASON for which he should have been impeached.
8
There is a significant correlation between a successful government of the people, by the people, for the people and the electorates knowledge level. The reign of many local, state and national political office holders bespeaks the malaise, indifference, and knowledge level/education of the electorate.
It should be noted that many of history's dictators, warlords, did not (have not) lasted a long a some of our co called "elected" officials.. Our current system opens up the possibility of having in leadership positions effete individuals who simply should not be there or who stay too long.
The sustainability of our democratic republic rest not only on the shoulders of functional literates who can pronounce and recognize words and some phrases, but an enlightened society that has the ability to apply the process of understanding and comprehending the written and spoken word.
15
"although it’s hard to see how people could imagine themselves benefiting from doing that"
In today's hyper-partisan political world, it is not at all difficult to imagine someone deciding that the benefit of keeping Judge Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court was well worth the risk. I do not claim that this is what occurred in this case, but one cannot make such a blanket dismissal of the possibility as the editors have done.
The one point well made, however, is that Mr. Judge should be testifying as well. According to the accusation, he was the only other witness to the event so his recollections are very relevant, and they need to be heard before a decision is made.
11
@mikecody, have you had to move out of your house because you are receiving death threats? Did you know that the family of Noah Pozner has been repeatedly threatened since their son was killed and that they have had to move from their home well over half a dozen times? I can't imagine it will be any easier for Dr. Blasey or her family. I would suggest that no one would willingly take this on just to possibly subvert Kavanaugh's nomination. I could be wrong, but unfortunately, this too will get overlooked and he will be confirmed, regardless of the attempted rape allegations. Her life will never be the same.
1
there had better NOT be a single Democrat voting 'yes' on this nomination. A POTUS under investigation for what could be high crimes should not be in a position to place a SCOTUS member (not to mention this one put forward by the Federalist Society). Dems need to be united, strong and principled in this action.
211
@A Jensen- yes, we’ll overlook the legal vetting that finds him to be incredibly qualified to serve.
1
Here's a principle for you: if you ain't got the votes because your own side couldn't be bothered to show up and vote while spending a significant part of its time attacking you, and voting "right," out of charming "principle," means you probably hand a Democratic seat in the Senate to the bad guys...
Well, see also Joe Manchin.
@A Jensen
The pathetic centrists will be arguing that some Democrats have to vote yes to save their seats.
The same pathetic centrists have been assuming since the beginning that there are no Republicans moderate enough to vote no.
Why do Democrats think they should always be reasonable even when they know that no Republicans are reasonable?
A plane with a right wing and a center wing cannot fly. That is the basic problem of the last 25 years.
Our government has no left wing.
The Democrats refusal to actually oppose the Republicans has our Republic in a death spiral.
Read the Constitution line by line, including the Bill of rights and the other Amendments. Then look at what Republicans do. They are against the letter and the spirit of the Constitution.
The Party of Trump have been saying over and over for forty years "the government our the enemy," and now they are attacking every institution of our Republic at the same time, even talking the side of Russian intelligence over the FBI
The Democratic Party made itself worse than irrelevant by refusing to oppose self declared enemies of our Republic who openly erect statues to traitors that declared war on their own country.
That is why Democrats lose 2/3 of all elections.
Democrats that vote with Republicans are worse than Republicans because they give Republicans cover for their bad behavior.
Stop compromising with traitors and protect the Constitution as you swore to do under oath with your hand on the bible.
"Attempted rape" - thank you for finally using those words. That's an accurate description of what the charge is, not "groping". Groping is touching someone's breast or rear end. Attempted rape is much more than enough, and should be more than enough, to put a juvenile into the justice system, while "groping" is not enough, and should not be enough. "Groping" is teenage boy behavior; attempted rape is NOT.
154
@XXX I agree except that even "groping" should not be acceptable behavior (for anyone at any age) without consent. It's not prison-worthy, but neither is it acceptable.
7
@XXX
please let's remember that most ~ if not all ~ behavior is learned from watching and imitating. I would never call "groping" teenage boy behavior; I would never allow that to easily slip off my tongue. I would say that teenage boys learn that this behavior is okay because they see it and they know they won't be called on it because people like you think it's normal "teenage boy behavior." This is exactly the kind of thinking and behavior that must change if we are to live in a society where we treat women with respect and where young boys/men learn to keep their hands to themselves.
8
Serious investigation...during this reality TV moment in politics?
4
Surprised that Linsey Graham turned into such an unabashed boot licker to Donald Trump. What are they all afraid of except for their majority, which they may be in the process of blowing regardless. A bunch of spineless amoeba.
Let the FBI look into it.
242
@Bob
What are the Democrats afraid of?
That the left base might actually become powerful enough to stop the Republicans.
That is why Democrats beg for compromise from a Pay at war with the Constitution, while they attack the left which is actually fighting for justice.
1
I’m surprised that anyone would be surprised that all Mitch McConnell cares only about his majority and literally nothing else.
2
@Bob My theory is that Graham is being blackmailed. It is very, very hard to understand his behavior otherwise. And it has long been thought that he has what to be blackmailed about.
4
Gee, I just recalled a hidden memory of when American politics ACTUALLY WORKED.
23
Aren't you tired of the way the GOP keep shoving this nominee at us. If we had a more moral minded GOP they would have stopped the hearings also demanded Mr Kavanaugh to get a polygraph like his accuser. Instead the GOP new is to throw her under the bus and keep the hearings going to nominate him. lf they shove this women abuser in to office when the Democrats take over the house we need to remove him for the good of the country and to save the planet from coal and fossil fuel destruction.
53
I agree with everything in the editorial, but it also needs to be said that Trump, as with the Porter and Moore sexual abuse accusers, Trump does not even give the time of day to Dr Ford only to his potential saviour Kavanaugh. He shows his misogynist traits in living color.
75
There really isn't anything for the FBI to investigate. There is no specific date, location, or first hand corroboration of Blasey's accusation. Who/what would they investigate? Right now, it is not a he said/she said, but rather a she said/he said/he said/he said as 3 people (Kavanugh, Judge, and Patrick Smyth) who were identified by Blasey at being at this supposed party all say they have no recollection of the party ever happening, let alone the 'attempted rape', that Blasey says happened.
What more would the FBI learn? Should they track down every deleted tweet about supposed 36 year old high school rumors from people with admitted no first hand knowledge? What is that going to tell anyone?
Why Blasey's lawyer is asking these people to testify when they have already sent in letters to the judiciary committee stating their recollection of the supposed event and denying it ever even happened seems like a questionable strategy.
Blasey obviously did not want to come forward because she has nothing to back up her claims, yet the Democrats put her up as a sacrificial lamb to slaughter all in a last minute effort to derail a Supreme Court nomination by casting a cloud over this man that he can never disprove. And people, including this editorial board, have fallen for it hook, line, and sinker due to their own political bias.
21
Not only do I adore the gall of that "obviously," I wonder why you'd fret so regarding doing an investigation and revealing--that's the word the conspiracy theory boys adore, "revealing"--that it's all a Democrat plot.
Since it's so "obvious," that that's what's up here.
@Chris
Pure conjecture.
1
@Chris You do offer up an interesting view of reality.
Who will play Brett in the movie version titled "Saving Pervert
Kavanaugh?"
9
@David Henry I can't think of an actor that is that squirrely and unattractive.
2
@David Henry
How about Finn the Dog from Adventure Time.
It is so incredibly obvious that this is a ploy, and has been from the beginning, for Democrats to delay this nomination until after the November elections, and only an editorial board wearing black eye patches with tight blinders over them could possibly not see this. Dr. Ford makes an accusation two months back, sends it to Senator Feinstein, who then sits on it for six weeks without telling even her own party, so that she can introduce it to the world after the Senate hearings are completed and a vote is about a week away. She excuses her tardiness by telling us that Dr. Ford did not want to go public with it. Well, then why did she write it? Feinstein then says that she went public with it only when leaks to the media started to emerge. Who leaked it? Certainly not the Republicans who, it is agreed, didn't know anything about it at all. Dr. Ford didn't want to go public, but weeks back she both took a lie detector test (why and for whom?), and hired a noted (and Democrat supporting) lawyer to represent her. Why, where and for what purpose all of this if she wasn't going public. Now, after being offered a public forum to testify this coming Monday, she says she will not do so until the F.B.I.. has investigated her charge - in other words, almost certainly after the next election - even though the F.B.I. has already done 6 other investigations of Kavanaugh and has no jurisdiction in this anyway, this while Kavanaugh sits ready to testify that same day. It all STINKS!
17
@Joe Pearce It's called "strategy". And it seems that it's ok if Republicans are strategic and Dems are not? You could turn this all around and say this is a ploy by Republicans to ram through a conservative judge so they can go to their constituents and declare a SCOTUS victory to gain votes. Turnabout is fair play. Same scenario, different interpretation.
8
@Joe Pearce
There is no reasonable explanation as to why Feinstein wouldn't want to bring this to the forefront immediately, other than what she has said. The argument you present falls flat.
3
@Joe Pearce Anyone who is acquainted with the smear job visited on Anita Hill when she came forward to testify against Silent Clarence, shining light of the judiciary, would hesitate to step forward to bring attention to the nefarious doings of a Supreme Court candidate. Perhaps you don't remember those hearings. One GOOD thing about them, though, was that the President directed the FBI to do an investigation into Prof. Hill's accusations. The current resident of the White House has an idea that investigation isn't what the FBI likes to do. This is a serious charge: do you really think anyone should be making decisions about it based solely on some gut feeling evoked by testimony from two individuals? Our legal system doesn't work like that even with accused shoplifters. What is Kavanaugh afraid of?
4
I am sure the NYT knows this, you can write all the editorials you want, it won't change a thing. The "Swamp" controls everything in this country and will not let go especially when they're about to have the Supreme Court in their grip. By next week this man will be sitting on the SCOTUS unless something big really happens. They have succeeded in scaring the woman to death and she probably will not show up. The iron hand of the tyrant just getting stronger.
32
@Adlibruj I am afraid to admit you may be right.
@Adlibruj So you think journalism informing the public isn't worthwhile, that it doesn't "change a thing"? How do you know?
These are the same people that refused to even have a hearing on Merrick Garland for 300 days. But now that there's an election in 43 days, they've got to slam Brett Kavanaugh through. You've got to be kidding if you think Republicans will do anything that is not in their own best interest. All these people were elected to their office, so look in the mirror if you don't like these results. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
236
Background of Professor Ford...Kavanaugh’s accuser..
COMMON SENSE: Now that Christine Blazey Ford has come forward, some interesting things about her are beginning to surface. Knowing this would happen, perhaps it's the real reason why Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) kept these allegations secret since July. Here is what we now know:
1) The brother of Christine Blazey Ford worked for Fusion GPS. Wow, what a coincidence.
2) Martha G. Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh, was a Maryland district judge in 1996. She was the judge in a foreclosure case in which Christine Blasey Ford’s parents were the defendants. Martha Kavanaugh ruled against the parents of Christine Blasey Ford in the foreclosure case.
3) Ford's lawyer is a big Democrat donor who was involved in the Clinton / Paula Jones case.
4) Christine Blazey Ford is a far left professor and an open-borders activist who has signed anti-Trump immigration letters.
5) She also deleted her social media accounts just before coming forward.
6) An "online professor rating site" has numerous reviews by from her students. Some say that they think she's crazy, and they were actually scared by her behavior.
6
7) She took and passed a polygraph which said her story was true.
4
@MelGlass
1. I believe he worked for a company associated with GPS. He left the company in 2004
2. It never went to court, the bank and her parents reached an agreement and her parents kept the house. Kavanaugh OK'ed the agreement.
3. And your point is??
4. Where is your evidence.
5. I would too if I didn't want to put up with all the hatred coming at me
6. Wrong professor, wrong college.
12
Most of this has been debunked (see article in same subscription). But thanks for rounding up all the smear campaign in one place .. and amply illustrating why women are STILL deciding to bury their pain and sorrow rather than come forward. Note that not only Ford, but also her family, are being targeted. So classy! Who wouldn't decide, "it's just not worth it"
2
In a perfect world if a person brought forth an allegation like this, That persons report would be taken. Then the authority who took the report would do a debrief with the reporting person to make sure they have got all the information. Then there would be an investigation of the allegations where the accused were debriefed and other people spoken to.
If the republicans know this is not a democratic conspiracy or organized planned attack and they fear it may be true as they know how prior investigation results can get Swiss cheese holes in areas that were solid to all appearances before. So they lie and make assertions they know are false about memory, mistaken identity, lack of detail and of course conspiracy to undermine their oh so righteous and honorable process of government. Now we have to hurry but when Merrick Garland was nominated they wouldn't even consider him and left the court without a 9th justice for over a year. What is the hurry about? Answer- They have been trying to get full control of all 3 branches of government to subvert the checks designed into the system for 40+ years so that they can impose one party rule on us. They are within spitting distance of achieving that goal and don't want to see it derailed.
Now this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-...
7
@magicisnotreal
Second paragraph should start with the word "The". I'm not suggesting they don't know I am asserting they do.
@magicisnotreal - ah, The Guardian, that bastion of unbiased reporting....
1
Sorry, but what you see is what you got. An autocracy. soon to be an outright dictatorship supported by a pollitical party who somehow have acquired this very noticeable brown stain on all their noses.
What is difficult to understand is why the constituencies of all those Republicans who they put in office who are afflicted with total subservience to his dictatorial Trumpership are not raising hell with his open and obvious efforts to dismantle the democracy our forefathers put together and get it totally under his control.
One can only assume it's what they want since they're not uttering so much as a peep.
84
@Alex Vine
The republicans whom have been working on subversion of the 3 branches check on power for 40+ years imagine they have control over El Trumpo and that he is their useful fool. They do not seem to get that he is in his element with all this criminal abuse of authority going on around him he is in hog heaven. He is the parasite that makes the ant climb to the top of a grass stalk to be caught by a bird.
1
At least we now know Judge Kavanaugh's true view of Due Process.
281
We voted these people into office. We're getting what we deserve. Incompetence, self serving interests and lies at the highest levels of government. Americans do not know what it is to have a functioning government. We don't want to pay for one. We vote in the people who say that they feel our pain, who claim that tax cuts are what the economy needs, who tell us that they care about the little guy, and who say what we want to hear.
If we want competent government we need to pay more attention to how things are not working now. Do you want senators and representatives who are bought and sold by industries? You've got them. Do you want someone who will ignore what it is to be middle class, worried about paying your bills, concerned that your job could disappear tomorrow and never be replaced? Don't vote for a Paul Ryan, a Mitch McConnell, or a Donald Trump.
Do you want rational government? Do you want to see our infrastructure upgraded? Stop asking for tax cuts. If you don't want to live in a banana republic don't vote for these people. Otherwise we will continue to see this sort of stupidity.
8
@hen3ry
I don't like that old adage as it is based on an assumption that people are fit to choose as is. We all have the right but without proper education making good long term sustainable choices is very unlikely. Add to that the people have been intentionally miseducated and propagandized for 40 years by an organized cabal (GOP) and it is unfair to say they deserve what they got when they were raised from childhood to be ignorant and unable to make proper choices.
1
@magicisnotreal You make some good observations--but a goodly number of Americans DO manage to inform themselves, overcome the ignorance that has been made so popular, and cast their votes for the general good. How can we get through to those "raised from childhood to be ignorant and unable"? In other words, how do we raise fewer consumers and more citizens?
@magicisnotreal I heartily disagree. America's citizens are horrible: narcissistic, lazy, and arrogant beyond all measure. Trying to paint them as victims of propaganda and miseducation is a cop-out that speaks to a lack of values and moral integrity. Your soul is your responsibility, no on else's. Your vote is yours and yours alone. Americans have an irrational aversion to criticism and self awareness. They have no desire to examine and improve themselves. They crave flattery and comfort. It's revolting. It is telling that in our courts we have no plea of innocence, only guilty or not guilty. It's only bad if you get caught. Well, this is what that kind of depravity gets you.
Kavanaugh was always going to be confirmed, no matter what obstacle was place in front of him. Is it right, of course not, but he will be sitting on the Supreme Court in the not to distant future.
Our Country is more liberal now than ever before, yet this new makeup on the court will literally be in opposition to the "will of the people". The last election demonstrated that with HRC receiving 3 million more votes. So what to do?
Fight like the dickens, and elect a Democratic House and Senate and President. Then increase the Supreme Court to eleven members. That's what we need to do.
14
@cherrylog754
No Kavanaugh was not always going to be confirmed, and the fact that the Democrats kei saying they can't stop it is why I don't vote for Democrats.
Trump is a corrupt president appointing a Justice to Obstruct Justice.
We the People cannot let that stand, and the fact that the Democrats are treating it like a normal parish Court fight, instead of a real attack on our very Republic, scored that they are spineless tools of global billionaires not a real opposition party.
This is not normal partisan politics. This is a full on assault on the Constitution.
2
What should occur is that both parties appear in whatever forum Dr. Blasey prefers on Monday. After testimony, if there is clearly a path for investigation; that is, points of fact or other evidence surfaces then for sure an investigation should occur.
My question is though, surely both the Democrats and Republicans are already digging through this matter with all the resources at their disposal which I am sure are considerable. If so, why don't they both come forward with what they have now as part of the hearings on Monday.
Then a path to investigation actually may develop some legs. Right now, about the only thing they can do is get the yearbooks out and start questioning people. However, it is a little hard to question someone about an event, which has not been historically or geographically identified.
In any event, Dr. Blasey came forward with the allegations and she should back them up with testimony.
I know it will be traumatic and I do sympathize, but it is her duty to either further explain this to the committee or decide it is too painful. You cannot have it both ways.
3
It should come as no surprise that the Republicans will confirm this nominee as soon as they can, and regard any obstacles or objections as devious partisan tactics. It should come as no surprise because this is the same manner they have handled all issues for at least ten years. They are operating true to form and a sizable part of the electorate likes it that way.
14
@William
Yes and the Republican "moderates"'will vote for a corrupt nomination by a corrupt president.
Centrist Democrats keep voting for Republican legislation and Republican nominees even though Republicans rarely return the favor.
I am not represented by a party that does not oppose the Party of Trump with everything it has.
I will not vote for Democrats built RESIST is more than a sticker in your window.
1
While I agree an investigation would be useful, it should have been started months ago if it were feasible. However, in this case it appears impossible to do an actual investigation. Dr. Blasey has no knowledge of the place or date of the incident. From the news accounts, she has given somewhat different answers as to how many folks were in the room to her therapist a few years ago (4) versus the more recent account (3) And the one person she says was in the room,M. Judge, states that he has no knowledge of such an incident. Without more information, it is impossible to investigate the incident and get any reliable information.
7
Beyond the minor technical detail that the way one gets, "more reliable information," is to INVESTIGATE, and the other minor tech detail that if we couldn't investigate now because we haven't wifficient info on which to base an investigation the same would have been true your "months ago," you're flipping oddly between claims of certainly you don't have, and claims of uncertainty about what you do have available.
And both Kavanagh and Judge are iffy on this as well.
1
@Robert - the FBI already DID investigate Kavanaugh, as they do any nominee to SCOTUS. They’re pretty good at their jobs, yet the incident did not come up. No one said they knew of it. No one said they’d heard of it.
@Rob-Chemist Haven't I read that Mr. Judge has written memoirs in which he admits to a blind-drunk school career? Black-outs, drunken sprees.... If the incident described by Prof. Blasey took place during one of those blind drunks, it's possible that Mr. Judge WAS there but has NO recollection of what a good time he and his buddy had at the party. This is why investigations are better than single-person replies to questions the questioners already feel they know the answers to....
4
To do list to save democracy:
>limit terms on SC
>end electoral college
> limit campaign funding and amount of time of campaigning
>make college education available for everyone, re-education for those who lose jobs due to technology
>fix roads and bridges before they collapse
>health insurance for all citizens
>fix the immigrant situation, save lives.
In any order, with grim determination,
rise up to the bar of other functioning democracies on this planet.
What will it take?
18
@Jacalyn Carley
None of that is possible if Democrats let the Party of Trump continuously undermine the Constitution and treat it like normal partisan politics.
The Constitution is the rules for making decisions. That are blowing up all the rules.
If we let them blow up all the rules, the decisions we be made by the People with the most guns.
That's Trump's base.
This does not need to be investigated. There is not nearly enough information to warrant an FBI investigation, and the fact that she's (all of a sudden) not willing to testify under oath indicates to me this is a political hack job. This is a desperate attempt to delay a confirmation that's going to happen anyway. Even Dianne Feinstein is backing off, saying she can't guarantee what Ford says is true.
Being willing and able to listen to women is what we all need to be. We need to be open to believing women when they come forward with allegations. However, they have to come with receipts. Ford has none. Demanding FBI investigations be conducted without probable cause is what Trump does. I thought democrats were better than that. This case is not the hill anybody should want to die on.
10
Assault victims have to show "receipts?" For what, gas?
7
Two decades after Anita Hill spoke, women who accuse powerful men of abuse are ridiculed, undermined, and threatened. No one would speak out like this unless it was true. Christine Blasey Ford is getting death threats, she has been forced from her home, and her life will never be the same.
Women in this country deserve better. Unfortunately, the GOP does not care about women.
95
I am shocked, shocked to find that political maneuvering is going on here. (As shocked as Captain Renault in my favorite movie, Casablanca.)
5
It's almost unfathomable the atrocious behavior, via words, that has arisen the past few days. Is there no critical thinking in all of this clamor? It seems everyone feels a need to express their knee-jerk response to this whole "disaster". Man-made pressure on all sides seems to be driving this narrative. The only one, as far as I can see, is the accuser, who is calm. She stated what happened to her and what she sees is needed in order to continue this. Have I missed anything?
3
Is it any wonder that nothing of substance gets done by the bunglers running our country, there is nothing but continual obfuscation and obstruction from both sides allowing diversion from important things such as the wars still going on in the Middle East, our broken healthcare system(I have been trying to get a primary care physician in the Oregon Coastal town of Bandon Oregon for four years with no luck although I have both Medicare, Blue Cross Blue Shield supplement and pay my bills on time, think twice before you buy your dream home in a rural area the savings will be more than offset by the hours you drive to see a Dr., the hotels you have to stay in etc. ), the deregulation of banking, the destruction of Unions, with consent from all parties, the tax giveaways to companies such as Amazon so a State can have bragging rights to “ growth and jobs” no matter if the cost of those jobs in tax losses outweighs the pay workers actually receive, but don’t worry their will be plenty of seats on boards as rewards at the end of the day. This is not to say this is not a serious accusation, but to wait thirty years too make it, coinciding with the political event smacks of nasty politics one thing this country still does excell at. I don’t agree with Kavanaughs views for the most part but the FBI did investigate him at length already.
2
The first time I recall hearing about Grassley he was claiming that the Affordable Care Act provided for "death panels." I see that he hasn't improved with age.
44
Who created this spectacle?
Feinstein, when she sat on a criminal accusation and then tried to use it at the last minute for political expediency.
The only thing that needs to happen is for the accuser to go on record armed with her facts.
11
@MPA
Kavanaugh created this spectacle when he decided that Ford was his sexual property.
5
Everyone deserves better than another Georgetown Prep graduate. Trump’s last Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, attended Georgetown Prep at the same time as Kavanaugh. Surely a little more life experience diversity in justice nominees would benefit everyone.
108
@Bob
One could make the same argument about Ivy league educated presidents and vice presidents. Don't single out Georgetown Prep. It's a fine institution with many successful and good alumni.
@Bob
Kavanaugh would be the sixth Catholic on the Court.
Meanwhile if any other organization had this record of mass child molestation for decades (if not millennia) on every continent it would be prosecuted as a child sex cult.
Why would we or another Catholic on the Supreme Court?
But more importantly, Trump is a corrupt president nominating a Justice to obstruct justice.
Trump's while reason for this nomination is that Kavanaugh has said that a president can only be investigated by Congress. Trump expects him to end the Mueller investigation.
No other issue is nearly as important.
1
Honestly, though, at this point, should we be surprised by anything the Trump-inspired Republican Party does?
22
Money is speech, as decided by the Supreme Court.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
A Supreme Court "Judge" is, in reality, part of a jury, a jury that is presented with facts and then retires to make a decision. Imagine if all juries were able to be lobbied, or paid, by interested parties...
I point this out as, if there were ever a time when our Congress represented all of the people, that time isn't now. The Republicans who run things, including the Executive Branch, are hirelings of the rich investor class, and that class pays a lot to make sure the game is rigged. He who has the most money gets to rig the jury pool.
So whoever gets nominated will most likely be a Republican functionary who will overturn Roe V. Wade.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
10
@Hugh Massengill
Yes this is a corrupt nomination by a corrupt president.
All patriots must shut it down.
1
The reasons Senate Republicans are trying to push Kavanaugh through are obvious. They want Kavanaugh's evangelical opinions to reverse Roe v. Wade. They want Kavanaugh to be the "no" vote for allowing a sitting POTUS to be indicted. They stated they must protect Trump at all costs if Mueller III gets too close, and Mueller has already gotten too close. With Cohen and Manafort about to roll over, it's even more imperative they confirm Kavanaugh NOW.
With the mid-terms coming up in just weeks, it's more imperative than ever. If they lose the Senate, the Democrats will confirm the SC seat, and their agenda will be toast for decades.
The manipulative dirty tricks Congressional Republicans have been playing for years are coming back to haunt them. Thank Mitch McConnell. But what does Lindsay Graham call the obstruction he helped perpetrate on the Senate's blatant refusal to even hold a hearing for Garland? If Dr. Blasey's accusations are a "drive by shooting" then their refusal to consider Garland was a slow and tortuous premeditated murder?
We have every reason to believe Ms. Blasey is more than credible. I'm in favor of allowing the FBI to investigate. First, Republicans scream about there being no "due process" afforded to Kavanaugh before someone "destroys a good man's career." Then, when the accuser agrees to an investigation, Republicans scream that it isn't necessary.
And Trump continues to be stupid.
This is so transparent.
10
@JL22
"They want Kavanaugh to be the "no" vote for allowing a sitting POTUS to be indicted."
Exactly
This nomination was not made to do the People's business. It was made to protect Trump from investigation.
Trump is a corrupt president making a corrupt nomination to obstruct justice.
And Democrats are treating it like a normal court appointment????!!!!!
1
Dr, Ford and her family have been forced into hiding because of death threats and serious harassment. This is witness tampering of the worse sort.
The Senate must demand protection for her and her family, while also requiring the FBI to track down and prosecute those responsible for the threats.
The President and Senate Republican Senators are encouraging mob politics with their indifference to this assault on Dr Ford and her family.
110
@Pat Choate
The Party of Trump calls for second amendment remedies. That means assassination, like with the abortion providers they assassinated.
Trump regularly calls for protesters to be beaten up at his rallies.
Trump promotes police brutality and torture.
The Party of Trump is against the Constitution.
Can we stop compromising with these traitors, who regularly declare that our government is "the enemy???!!!
The is nothing reasonable, grown up, or intelligent about compromising with traitors.
1
@Pat Choate
Along with the sexual assault that did take place in that bedroom at that party, I am curious about a duplicitous dynamic here:
Who decided to throw an alcohol-fueled party for a bunch of teens in the first place? Whose parents sponsored this drunk fest? These were high school teenagers who got drunk, REALLY drunk. And one boy is accused of sexually assaulting a younger girl, Christine Blasey, possible with the help of another boy. According to the victim, she was cornered into a bedroom and overpowered with a hand over her mouth so she couldn't scream for help.
Is it common among elite parents to sponsor a party for teens and provide the alcohol? There names need to be made public in the course of the investigation and testimony.
What strikes me about this spectacle is the three senior, ossified members of the judiciary committee: Feinstein, 85, Grassley, 85, and, Hatch 87 appear to have gained no wisdom from all of their years of public service. They are wedded to the same narrow ideology they had at their beginning and beholden to the same monied interests who have purchased their votes for many years.
The treatment that Anita Hill received by Grassley and Hatch is the same they are foisting on Dr. Ford, blaming the victim.
She should not testify in front of this kangaroo court where decisions have already been made.
What a farce!
18
It's clear at this time that a lot of people simply do not - and perhaps never will be able to - comprehend the experience of having been sexually assaulted. All too often, victims do not take notes; they do not broadcast their assault; they do not tell authorities or files complaints/charges, and; indeed, many simply never tell anyone.
Demands for "proof" or self-righteous critiques that a victim is "not credible" because they do not behave rationally as others would have them, indicate we have a long way to go. If any good can come from this, I hope it is greater understanding of how these things often play out afterwards. It's messy. It's real.
Let the FBI investigate.
21
This is a very difficult situation. I am somewhat surprised that the Time’s editorial board is so one-sided on this issue. Yes, this woman has made a very serious accusation against a Supreme Court nominee. But why does she refuse to testify in front of the Senate? Why does she want an FBI investigation first? I’m sorry but this woman has been given a golden opportunity to testify about what took place 30 years ago but she refuses to do so. That makes absolutely no sense to me. This is her chance to tell her story. I have no sympathy for someone who will not come forward after making such serious allegations. If she fails to appear before the Senate on Monday then it’s hard to blame the Senate for going forward with the vote.
13
@Mike L Why would any sane person want to be forced to re-live such a horrendous incident as attempted rape, without there first having been an impartial investigation into the facts of the case? Would you enjoy having to put yourself in the public eye if you had been raped in high school?
3
@Mike LWhat is so difficult and or improper to add the benefit of the FBI investigation in order to make absolutely sure that the events in question really happened. I for one believe a lot in the justice of the USA.
2
@Mike L
I can only assume you are very young. Dr. Ford has accused Kav of a felony crime. You are correct, it is a very serious accusation. And now she is in hiding from credible death threats. It is not really that hard to imagine why she would not want to appear without some serious backing, is it? Kav has an army of republican zealots, gun nuts, and a fake president who is impulsive, obnoxious and aggressive backing him up. Not to mention that Kav has already once attacked her and gotten away with it. You need to examine your morals if you can't muster any sympathy for a rape victim.
3
Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, John Cornyn, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, John Kennedy, Lindsey Graham--all members of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary.
Drunk on power and the privilege entrusted to them by all American voters, they are having their way with an institution, and a process, meant to serve the American people.
From their position as the majority on the Judiciary Committee, they surveyed their prospects and decided to use their status to violate, by brute force, the confirmation process for nominees to the Supreme Court.
They are, in fact, serial violators.
Merrick Garland was also one of their victims.
This despicable behavior on the part of republicans who find themselves in positions of power has played out in many ways in the Trump administration.
Winner take all and too bad if they, the American people, don't like it.
Stumbling drunk on power and privilege and destroying everything in their path: institutions, reputations, rule of law, decency, truth.
Drunk on power and careening around on the world stage.
Relieving themselves on the wall which separates the United States from chaos and decline.
An orgy of excess from which we will all suffer the hangover.
18
@interested party
Yes exactly, and the Democrats act like this is all normal.
They sat by and watched McConnell steal their seat, and now they are playing stupid games, while a corrupt president makes a corrupt nomination to obstruct justice.
Leadership means explaining to the American People loudly and clearly exactly what is going on.
1
The false narrative that this Supreme Court nominee will be the end of the US as we know is has led to a lot of Intellectual dishonesty. There’s nothing to investigate and the other two parties named said it never happened. 36 year old high school alleged incidents shouldn’t even make the cut for something to talk about seriously. On top of this, it isn’t just he said, she said. It’s everyone she can name said vs fuzzy memories and contradictions she said. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.
This accusation counted on a free no facts or evidence required ride on the #MeToo movement and has failed miserably for all but only the most desperate to derail a nomination.
12
@David The witness to the event Mr. Judge did not say that it did not occur. He stated that he does not recall the incident, which is completely different from saying it didn't happen.
4
@David
This is a corrupt president nominating a Justice to obstruct justice.
It is not a false narrative.
4
@David
"derail a nomination"?
Like that of Merrick Garland, Brett Kavanaugh's present BOSS on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit?
THAT was derailing a nomination. BIGLY.
1
The GOP is experiencing another #We-Don't-Care moment.
20
For most of my life I kept quiet about the sexual abuse at the hands of my relatives. I was afraid. No one would understand. Then I was raped in the military. After 2 weeks of hiding it, I finally confessed the assault to my superiors. The retaliation was brutal. It took 30 years before I was able to discuss it again. I feared retaliation. It took a few more years to discuss what happened without collapsing in fear and tears. To expect Dr Ford to somehow produce all of this information at a moments notice and to publicly talk about this accusation, even in a closed hearing is more difficult than anyone can imagine. I understand. I’ve been there. There should be an investigation. Kavanaugh would sit on the court for years...what’s a few more weeks. Be realistic Republicans. Have some heart. Show some empathy. Unless you’ve been sexually assaulted you cannot understand what Dr Ford is confronting. I do.
60
"What matters is that Dr. Blasey has made a serious, specific and credible allegation. Sure, Democrats may want to investigate that claim fully. But so should anyone concerned about protecting the Supreme Court’s integrity, not to mention the reputations of both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Blasey."
And there is your answer. Anyone concerned about protecting the Supreme Court's integrity. It should be obvious to anyone concerned with finding and following the truth that the republicans in the Senate are not in the least concerned about the court's integrity. NOT IN THE LEAST.
That should have been obvious when the republicans refused to do their constitutional duty and advise Obama on his supreme court nomination of Merrick Garland. Those senators failed to fulfill their oath to the constitution. We've been in a constitutional crisis ever since...exacerbated by the election of Trump.
Bottom line, if the republicans were willing to walk all over Obama and Merrick Garland, this Kavanaugh business is small potatoes. They are only going through the motions of appearing to give Blasey Ford a hearing. None of them will be listening to a word she says...though their aides will be expected to find something, anything to use against her. Dog and pony show...anyone?
For those of us who expect the constitution to actually be followed and adjudicated, there is only one option
VOTE OUT ALL REPUBLICANS
33
The Republican Senate, Judge Kavanaugh, the entire GOP and the president are all peas in the same corrupt and unjust pod. Their naked abuse of power is what Americans should consider when they vote on November 6.
Ms. Blasey’s accusations against the Republican nominee have upset the GOP apple cart, and the stodgy, irascible, cranky and inflexible Republican Senate wants only a speedy end to these proceedings. The optics are not helpful for the GOP senators. They have cast doubts on Ms. Blasey’s recollection of the events of the past and are poised to tar and feather her as they did Hillary Clinton.
If Kavanaugh had any character at all he’s insist on an FBI investigation to clear his name. The president doesn’t seem to like investigations of any kind, into himself or his hand-picked nominee and Senate Republicans are both senile and indifferent to the damage the president has done to them, their party and the country.
10
Pethaps, but that would require a Constitutional amendment — a kengthy, drawn out process under the best of circumstances. In the meantime, there will likely be more vacancies to fill.
If this travesty goes through and Kavanaugh is confirmed, then whoever is running for president in 2020 better make it part of his/her campaign pledge to initiate proceedings against Kavanaugh or expand the court. If Republicans want to play tit for tat when they're in power, fine. They broke it by politicizing the last institutional pillar in this country. Let the court expand to 11 or however many members - it would undoubtedly be more fair than the current situation.
67
Dr. Blasey came forward with her experience, convinced of the importance of having it known, but hesitant to expose herself and her family to the predictable consequences. Having now done so in a demonstration of immense courage, the Senate should demonstrate a fraction of that courage and have the allegation thoroughly reviewed.
258
@Jack and yet, having come forward and initially agreeing to testify, she now says she is not willing to put the accusations forth in the only body which has the power to do anything about them, the Senate.
Reopening the already closed hearings on Monday is giving her the chance to have the allegation reviewed.
4
@Jack
Investigate yes---but with a strict time limit. Considering that kavanaugh has been investigated many times in the past I would suggest one week. No more.
This is clearly an attempt by democrats to delay the confirmation until after the midterms. Under no conditions should the republicans allow that to happen.
1
@Concernicus
The FBI does not look at your behavior as a juvenile when they do background checks. There is a reason they specify 18 as adulthood.
So they have not looked into his juvenile behavior but now that a significant crime has been alleged they should.
Judge Kavanaugh has an impeccable record? If so, why has the White House held back over 100,000 documents and redacted information in what has been released? Why did GOP Senators release 42,000 pages of Kavanaugh documents only the night before the hearings? Surely it's worthwhile to allow adequate time for a full review of his record
318
Irregardless of the allegation by Dr. Blasey, either right or wrong, the fact is, the entire nation and beyond knows of this. Considering that fact, I cannot see how the Supreme Court could possibly function if Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed and takes a place there. The deliberations among the Justices after their due diligence would be strained and overshadowed by questions of Kavanaugh's regard for women. On matters of most serious natures, this is problematic and would turn the court from one of dignity and equality for all under law into an illegitimate body easily challenged by those aggrieved by their decisions. Their judgments would not be respected and might be overturned by succeeding terms on a wholesale basis. The court would be a hall of rancor and political animosity, not eloquent and considered law.
Judge Kavanaugh should know all this and the effects his presence there would reap. If he is a political motivated Judge even beyond traditional Republican ideology, he will cause harm to the court and be motivated by political desires and not dignified jurisprudence. Even if he is wrongly accused by Dr. Blasey, he must know all the harm the present Justices would incur with his presence. If he truly cares for a dignified court, one that assures well considered decisions free of political pressures and true to our Constitutional principles and assures equal justice for all, he will resign the nomination before he is confirmed. I implore him to consider his position.
8
If I read this right, you are suggesting that any political appointments where there is an accusation of impropriety on the part of the appointee (if i get this right, whether true or false) should be rescinded/declined.
That is nuts. If you truly believe that to be how things should be, don't you think that line of thinking could be used by either party as a weapon to shoot down appointments?
Let's give due process a chance. That is something that is actually in the Constitution.
2
@Waves of Brain
Your points are well taken. I believe Kavanaugh, does indeed know of the harm of which you speak. However, he will not voluntarily step aside. He, like Trump, is not in this for the sake of the nation.
3
@Waves of Brain
Just a note - it's "regardless."
1
What I see significant is that Mark Judge, the other witness, is not being called to testify about his observation and involvement. He is being ignored by the Republicans. The simple reason: they are afraid of what he might say under oath. To reporters, he may be hedging, but under oath, he will be forced to tell the truth, which Republicans fear will incriminate Kavanaugh. The thing about Republicans...they are so transparent in their deceptions.
313
@SP Of course this is only what a Liberal believes
1
@SP
Yup, get them to testify under oath and they stop supporting Kavanaugh in a heartbeat. That’s what GOP is afraid of. Mark Judge would be the first to abandon him.
2
Worse than lying under oath to Congress? Lying to the FBI. Lying to Congress might is against the law, but not likely to be prosecuted. Lying to the FBI is a felony that will put you in prison, which is why the Republicans and the President are refusing to get the FBI involved in investigating the allegations.
3
First, Ms. Ford's accusation is hardly credible. She can't remember when and even where this incident happened. Two alleged witnesses have come forward to say they weren't present or have no recollection of any party and, both added, that Judge Kavanaugh wouldn't have done that. I don't blame her for not remembering because this supposedly happened 35 years ago!
Getting to the point, what is there to investigate? No federal crime has been committed so there's no role for the FBI. The FBI conducts background checks and provides the information to the Senate so they can render a judgement as part of the "advice and consent" role. If anyone is to investigate it would be a local prosecutor in Maryland. Would any serious prosecutor really begin an investigation when it's clear that, by Ms. Ford's account. absent one remaining witness, there's no one else to interview anyway. At best it would be heresay.
Then we come to Ms. Ford not being willing to testify. I can appreciate that she wanted confidentiality (although in this country the accused has every right to confront the accuser). Once she gave her interview to the Washington Post, ostensibly because she wanted to the one to tell her story, the story and accusation became public. In my eyes, Senator Grassley is bending over backwards to be as accommodating as possible and provide that opportunity to Ms. Ford. Ms. Ford doesn't get to demand the Senate remake their process and procedures.
27
"No federal crime has been committed so there's no role for the FBI. The FBI conducts background checks and provides the information to the Senate so they can render a judgement"....... Investigating an alleged sexual assault is not an important part of a back ground check? Wow! In the NFL, when there is a pass play ruled complete, that might have been out of bounds, the offensive team rushes to the line of scrimmage to quickly run a play so the pass completion in question cannot be reviewed. Is that what you are suggesting?
15
@Ben R The fact that one area former student has reported that this incident was the talk of the town for several weeks is enough to justify a thorough investigation.
37
@Ben R Ms. Ford seems to remember exactly when and where ... it's the frat boy witnesses who have said they "don't remember any party." Maybe that's because she has had decades of PTSD and they have had decades of black-outs they were actually proud to share their stories about. Or maybe we should have simply avoided this debacle of conservative vs. liberal by allowing the elected president to propose a moderate candidate ... President Obama, that is.
2
A practical analysis
1. Blasey-Ford seems by all accounts to be a very decent, credible individual. Character attestations are strong.
2. Incident was 36 years ago. One alleged witness denies. No other direct witnesses alleged, even by accuser. No physical evidence exists. Common sense dictates that even if the FBI agreed to investigate (it is not their jurisdiction - State of Maryland would be jurisdiction), without any evidence, the case will be exactly as it is - he said/she said. For this reason, FBI investigation appears to be solely a partisan delay tactic.
3. She will likely engender a lot of sympathy and compassion if she testifies. Period. High likelihood that her mere appearance could sway Collins/Murkowski.
4. Not agreeing to testify Monday looks like a transparent stalling tactic. It will embolden Collins/Murkowski to think the same and give them full plausible deniability to confirm.
She should therefore testify Monday. She has leveled an accusation, made her identity known, knows what she knows, and should speak.
The GOP has given her the option to testify publicly or privately. The Dems would be well served to do it publicly.
66
@them....It is the FBI's job to run background checks on candidates for high office. For example they might investigate - In high school did Kavanaugh ever attend drunken parties? Who else attended these parties? Were women and sex involved? The answer someone gives to the FBI under threat of perjury might be somewhat different than the information they would volunteer.
2
@them
FBI has jurisdiction to investigate when investigating for clearance.
1
@them
What would be the point of her testimony if they haven't investigated? They have already openly declared they do not believe her in all but explicit sentences.
2
The Supreme Court should not be a political entity.
Perhaps the best way to confirm future justices is to have the final decision mad by a panel comprised of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats, with an equal mix of the two main parties. No 'convenient' political flip-floppers (such as Donald Trump) allowed.
17
Dr. Ford has the ability to work around the men in the Senate by going to the the States Attorney of Maryland and starting an investigation there. By doing that it will put the brakes on the confirmation process because you can't sit someone on the Supreme Court if they are under investigation. The Senate will then move to withdraw Kavanaugh frat boy, from consideration. This is a perfect chess play and would totally beat Grassley at his own game!
413
@Peter The Maryland statute of limitations in effect at the time of the alleged assault has long since expired. For that reason Maryland's attorney general is barred from any investigation into this matter.
21
@RichardThere is no statute of limitations for rape in the state of Maryland. Nevertheless, reliable evidence needs to be provided.
@Peter
That would be great, if it were in fact possible. Maryland has a 1 year statue of limitations on misdemeanor sexual assault. I doubt that this incident rises to the level of a felony...so I'm doubtful that the state attorney would pick up the investigation.
Nice try...it would be a great play if it could work.
2
Feinstein sat on this, deliberately, so it might be used to delay the hearing until after the November election. As to the need for the FBI to investigate: They have already vetted Kavanaugh -- 6 times, I hear, but I'm not sure how one counts them -- and found nothing of substance.
Too late.
30
@Texas Liberal
re "Feinstein sat on this, deliberately, so it might be used to delay the hearing until after the November election. "
Why did GOP Senators release 42,000 pages of Kavanaugh documents only the night before the hearings? Surely it's worthwhile to allow adequate time for a full review of his record.
79
@Texas Liberal Yeah, because the seat's been vacant now for almost TWO full months! How could we possibly delay any further to conduct a thorough investigation of the claim? True, we were able to leave Scalia's seat vacant for over a year, but that was a COMPLETELY different situation -- apples and oranges!
6
Nonsense. For a Republican Senate that delayed filling the Scalia vacancy for 14 months there no such thing as a delay.
8