Sen. Feinstein has been effective for years. But it’s a sign of her self-absorption that she’s running for re-election at 85. Some people know when it’s time to retire. Her (in)actions show its past her time. That she is unaware of this is a sad comment to a good career.
4
To have not acted immediately after she learned of the Kavanaugh accusations was a huge mistake on Feinstein's part. Whether or not it was a political move, we will probably never know. Either way, she should have acted much sooner.
What Ms. Feinstein did was unethical and unprofessional. It made her constituents like me cringe for having such an inept and corrupt individual represent us in Washington.
Ms. Feinstein should resign from the US Senate and if she does not, the Senate must censure her, strip her of all committee assignments and pass a resolution for her ouster. Kamala Harris should also deserve the same fate since she has been in cahoots with the senior senator.
What is the Senate equivalent of Impeachment?
2
Excellent summary. Sen. Feinstein is not a lawyer. She was poorly served by her legal staff, who should have told her that an accuser cannot remain anonymous in our system of justice. Dr. Blasey should have been told early on that she had to either put up or shut up.
DiFi deserves more than "withering criticism." She deserves to be defeated in the November general election and to go to assisted living.
2
When Senator Feinstein, with over 25 years experience in the Senate, arranged the Sept. 12 meeting of Democrat Senators, and disclosed Dr. Blasey's allegation, which the Senator then providing to the FBI, of course she realized the professor would be outed? How could she not? With Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination on the verge of moving on to the full Senate for consideration, politics become paramount. Sure, the Senator's actions would turn Dr. Blasey's life and the lives of her family upside down, but the allegations would at least create a cloud around Judge Kavanaugh's nomination.
If Senator Feinstein has been in possession of Mrs. Ford’s letter since the first of August why has she just now made it public? If she wants an investigation now why not as soon as she received Mrs. Ford’s letter? There would have plenty of time between her receipt of Mrs. Ford’s letter and now for an investigation.
Mrs. Feinstein’s delay is just one more reason people have become dissatisfied with Washington. Waiting until the last minute demonstrates her desire to blindside others so she can torpedo something she and her fellow Democrats oppose. (I doubt her Democratic colleagues were not blindsided, only the Republicans.) What we have here is another waste of taxpayer’s money.
This entire matter is going to turn out to be a he said, she said with no concrete evidence to support either side.
2
I support Sen. Feinstein in how she handled a difficult matter presented to her. We need to support her and Dr. Ford in telling the story. Mr. Kavanaugh should want this to have a hearing. If he believes in the law, this hearing should not bother him at all. Again, no one but Dr. Ford knows how it felt to be assaulted by a man who later is rushing to be on the Supreme Court. What a dilemma she was faced with.
2
A sad message we send to kids when adults can’t stick to basic right and wrong judgments. I’m really worried for this generation growing up with such lame role models.
Ford should press charges against Kavanaugh since she never did and end the questions of why she never did. Maryland has no statute of limitations on sexual assault. Follow the process.
My best guess is that she withheld the letter on the instrcutions of Chuck Schumer. Quite possible, in return for that that DNC would supprt her in her upcoming election.
We need Feinstein under oath.
1
Does no one remember what it was like 30 years ago when a woman complained of rape or sexual assault? They were demoralized; made to relive it over and over again; had their veracity questioned; made to feel it was their fault. It’s no one a 15 year old girl wouldn’t report it. Just think what she would have gone through. I applaud Senator Feinstein for respecting Christine Blakey Ford’s request. There aren’t many people left in this world who honor such requests.
7
I like Dianne Feinstein's approach, and have always admired her as a Senator while disagreeing (mostly) with her politics. But she does come off badly here.
The existence of Christine Ford's letter was known to only a few people. None of them were Republicans. Someone leaked the story to the Intercept. Dianne Feinstein should be looking into who did that instead of blaming the media for outing Christine Ford's letter.
Christine Ford's allegation could have been dealt with easily during the investigation into and hearing about Brett Kavanaugh. That's exactly what the investigation and the hearing were for. That they were not dealt with then is squarely on Christine Ford and Dianne Feinstein. Brett Kavanaugh should not have to suffer the consequences of their decisions.
I have long thought that Senators like Dianne Feinstein, Orrin Hatch, John McCain, Chuck Grassley and Patrick Leahy should retire. Some others are old too, but these just seem past their prime. Orrin Hatch is retiring, and John McCain died. The rest should rather quickly follow one of those two examples.
8
As a San Franciscan, I have followed Dianne's career since she assumed the mayoralty after the Moscone/Milk assassinations. Her career was born in the spotlight and, whatever one might say about her, she has always been at ease and cool in the spotlight. You can call her "under siege," but I suggest that she is Br'er Rabbit in the briar patch; right where she likes to be.
3
Something's not kosher in this whole thing. Why give a letter to the Honorable Senator Feinstein, if you don't want it used in the first place? What was the purpose of giving her the letter? Definitely smells of dirty tactics. This is comparable to Comey's actions right before the 2016 elections.
9
@older and wiser
“Something's not kosher in this whole thing. Why give a letter to the Honorable Senator Feinstein, if you don't want it used in the first place? What was the purpose of giving her the letter? Definitely smells of dirty tactics. This is comparable to Comey's actions right before the 2016 elections.”
Go to NPR and listen to the interview Dr. BF’s close friend gave on Friday. The purpose of the letter was to have the FBI investigate the matter. Dr. BF believed what happened to her was relevant to Judge Kavanaugh’s character especially as it relates to women. She was willing to be interviewed by the FBI but didn’t want to testify at the senate hearing with her attacker (Kavanaugh) in the room, reasonable behavior for a victim of sexual assault.
Here’s a question for you. Why won’t the White House request an FBI hearing and get Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge’s sworn testimony? Instead of attacking Dr. BF, let’s get Kavanaugh and Judge to testify about this under oath.
4
Ridiculous support of Feinstein. She needs to resign. Having in her hand an accusation that questioned the moral conduct of a candidate being considered for the highest court in the country, she simply sat on it. How could she call herself a leader of the liberal left, when she would have potentially let the confirmation of Kavanaugh continue undebated, fully knowing that he might have intentionally harmed another person.
Either she disbelieved Dr. Ford. Or she believes boys will be boys. Or worse perhaps she is related to the Kavanaughs and let personal emotions taint her judgement. In any case it seems certainly very poor judgement from a person who should have been especially aware of how to deal with such a situation, since she was energized by the travesty that was Dr. Hill's trial.
2
Senator Feinstein has handled the Dr. Blasey-Judge Kavanaugh situation properly by honoring Dr Blasey’s initial request for confidentiality and privacy. The media outed Dr. Blasey.
Mr. Trump claims Democrats “obstruct and resist “. I would like to remind him that Republicans are masters at it — hello Mitch. Republicans object when their strategies and tactics are used against them, as the French say “tant pis” (too bad). The Republicans want to rush Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation through in order to prevent any negative aspects of his background from seeing the light of day. They should see the light of day, sitting on the highest court in the land shouldn’t be bought quickly by the highest bidder.
5
She is just one among numerous examples of why we should have term limits for Congress as well as the Supreme Court Justices.
7
"Under pressure from other Democratic senators on the committee, several of whom felt any serious allegation must be publicized, Ms. Feinstein called a meeting on Sept. 12 to brief them on its contents for the first time.. She sent it to the F.B.I. that night."
Senate Democrats decided to out Ms. Ford for political gain.
6
There is a bind for those who criticize Feinstein's handling of the Blasey information but support Trump, who is single-handedly blowing the cover off any sense of propriety by whining in his tweets about being elected to swing the Supreme Court. At least that is obvious to everyone now.
Kavanaugh has his own problems because the committee chose to hide most of his documents, not let the FBI do an investigation when they have investigated every other thing under the sun, and then artificially set deadlines that mean nothing to the process for most Americans who saw them can Garland a year out.
5
Process is often more important than substance. Process is largely what our Constitution is about: the process of how individuals interact with each other and with their government. And as a survivor of sexual abuse myself and in matters such as Dr. Blasey has set forth, anonymity does not work. If you want to make a claim, you have to be responsible about it and take responsibility for it by identifying yourself and opening yourself up to rebuttal. Consequently, my problem with Senator Feinstein is with her response to Dr. Blasey's letter.
What may be for the first time in my life, I am agreeing with Pres. Trump and the Republican Senators. Her response should have been two-fold:
1. "I cannot do anything about this unless you agree to identify yourself publicly. I'm not saying that you should. Only that without your identity being revealed, your accusation cannot proceed."
2. "If you do want your accusation to proceed, it must be presented timely and so as to allow any other interested party, such as Judge Kavanaugh himself, to be heard on the matter, which means it must be presented along with all the other evidence at the Senatorial hearing regarding the Judge's nomination to the Supreme Court. It cannot be presented after the hearing, at least as regarding his ability to be confirmed as a Justice."
Senator Feinstein failed to do this, and now look at the mess that has caused.
6
@Richard
The "failed process" began with McConnell's utterly political and transparent power grab with the Garland nomination. Trump is unfit and his nominee has been rushed through with a minimum of information. Now the evangelical preachers are demanding action in the face of information that could potentially disqualify this man. The problem may have been made more complicated by Feinstein but it certainly did not start there.
5
Given the partisan divide in this country and the Republicans' determination to ram through the Kavanaugh nomination at breakneck speed, come hell or high water, Senator Feinstein was going to be criticized over her handling of the Ford letter no matter what she did.
People, can we please keep our eyes on the ball here? The important concerns are Kavanaugh's positions, whether or not he has lied under oath - both about what Ford alleges and during his earlier confirmation in reference to knowledge about stolen Democratic documents - and that the Republicans and the administration want this process to happen while withholding 90 percent of documents that would provide insight into Kavanaugh's record.
This entire confirmation process has been a partisan travesty, and Kavanaugh's equivocation - if not outright perjury - should be disqualifying for the high court.
Focusing on what Diane Feinstein did is a distraction. Don't fall for it.
3
I don't see how people can say Feinstein was "respecting the victim" by staying silent for months about the abuse allegation. Obviously when Blasey Ford came forward she wanted the issue to be looked into and talked about if Kavanaugh was nominated. She just wanted her name kept out of it so her whole life wouldn't be destroyed. If she didn't want it to be mentioned she wouldn't have said anything at all!
Unfortunately she has now given Republicans ammunition by not giving this info to the FBI sooner so it could have been part of the previous background investigations.
Of course none of this is Blasey Ford's fault. She did the right thing to contact her representatives and the media months ago. Republican's whining about Feinstein's mistakes have nothing to do with the credibility of Blasey Ford's allegations, and American's realize this fact.
Kavanaugh was a horrible pick. The sooner Republican's realize this and move on to another candidate the more likely they will be to actually get someone on the court before the Democrats take over the Senate.
If this whole, sordid mess isn't a call for term limits, I can't think of what is.
We as a Nation need to stand up and say "ENOUGH!"
We need a constitutional amendment limiting senators to 2 terms and 6 terms for representatives. Twelve years each. No member may be elected who will turn 70 during their term.
Serving the Nation as an elected official is a privilege, not a job career.
No member of Congress should ever be allowed to amass such power as we have now witnessed.
On a similar vein, disband the Electoral College. They most certainly failed in their obligation to our country 2016.
8
@Dismayed
Except that you'd be denying me my constitutional right to vote for whomever I please.
4
Leave Diane Feinstein alone. She’s always damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t. Oh right...she’s a woman
5
As a supporter of California Republicans...still holding on to the prosperity created when we had middle class in Cali, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Earl Warren....I am conflicted by Diane Feinstein's behavior. Yes, she makes me knash my teeth and rend my garments....but I've always respected her judgement . But now she's allowed herself to get sucked into some extemely dirty politics. But better she in the Senate than that self-absorbed corrupt clown Kevin DeLeon!! Therefore, it is necessary to re-elect Diane Feinstein....in hopes that we will ALSO elect a Republican Governor....John Cox. Gavin Newsome is the darling of the California Elite...so he's tough to beat. The deciding factor is the Independent Vote, which has been effectively suppressed by the DNC over the past 30 years.....(Am I supposed to believe that after Bernie lost in the Primary....all those independents turned around and voted for the lady that STOLE the primary???) I urge Californians to vote independent....dont let the DNC use fear mongering. The election is NOT about Trump. Forget him. This year...vote for Feinstein AND vote for John Cox. You'll see an improvement. NO FEAR.
1
"Even before the letter emerged, Ms. Feinstein had found herself criticized by liberal Democrats who believed she had been too timid and deferential in her treatment of Judge Kavanaugh."
There are good reasons for a representative of the minority party to be polite and deferential when dealing with agents of a hostile and militant majority. Strident attacks in the Senate and off the campaign trail are more likely to trigger a circle-the-wagons defensive reaction by the opposition than they are to change confirmation votes.
20
@Robert M: Vigorously disagree. Obama tried this approach for 6 years. how did that work out for us? when the shoe was on the other foot, did you hear Gingrich or Mcconnell speak deferentially to Obama or play nice in the sandbox? How about Trump: is he being professional? Time to stand up to the bully's.
I find it amusing that Trump and his senate cronies want to blame the Democrats for withholding the Blasey Ford information. This is their candidate. If he's responsible for bad behavior it's on them to find out before he gets the job offer. And I don't know about anyone else, but when I interviewed candidates for jobs, I absolutely would question how suitable that person would be to work with my team if I found out about something that had happened, even many years ago.
3
Feinstein knew she had a stick of dynamite (of questionable explosive power) and threw it in the mix when the usual hearings failed to come up with anything immediately disqualifying.
Mrs. Ford seems to be glad to play along. A hero to half the nation and to those she shares her political views with (friends, colleagues of Northern California) and a villain to the other half (although she probably doesn't care what Republicans think).
This is some scrappy and dirty politics but its the new reality in zero-sum Washington. It's a new low established by Democrats (not that Republicans haven't established previous new lows) and this'll all be precedent for even uglier dramas.
5
@LR Agree completely. Both parties play this dirty game. This time, Feinstein, along with Dr Ford, knew exactly what they were doing. Ford delivers this letter and tells Feinstein not to release it unless it's the last thing to keep Kavanaugh off the bench, when all else fails. This way, it covers both of them and makes it look like Feinstein is only protecting the "victim." Since then, Feinstein "can't remember" if she spoke to Ford since she received the letter. Obviously, she doesn't want any of these conversation to come out since they surely were negotiating this very situation to the entire time.
Does that make the accusation untrue - not at all. I'm not sure what to believe as far as that goes, but they were definitely trying to time this thing perfectly. Since that's the case, I have a hard time believing anything Ford says given that she tried to do all this for maximum publicity. If she really was a victim, she wouldn't have been playing politics this whole time, and certainly wouldn't have let Feinstein do it on her behalf.
3
It is similar to the Clarence Thomas appointment because the same liberal, lame, false accusations were attempted then as now. Its sickening.
7
No, the same vicious response to the accuser.
3
The split personality of NYT articles:
1. Horrid Republicans cannot say "times up" to Dr. Blasey.
2. Wily Sen. Feinstein sat on allegation until the 11th hour.
4
Trump's whine about "obstructing and resisting" would be best delivered to the corpse of the GOP that followed the instructions of Mr. McConnell who saw fit to obstruct and resist by name, the nomination of Mr Garland.
How stupid do they think the American public is??
2
@Kay Johnson, absolutely Mr. Garland (and also delay of many of Obama's lower court nominees; and McConnell elimination of the Supreme Court filibuster).
But less us also not forget Robert Bork; the delay of many of Bush's lower court nominees; and the Harry Reid elimination of the filibuster for all lower court nominees.
Neither party can claim the high road and much as we want to shield our eyes, the unfortunate reality is the Democrats started it with Bork. So bad and outrageous, "bork" is literally a verb now (to bork someone). . .
1
Ms. Feinstein, in my opinion, is too old to still be serving in the Senate (ditto Grassley, Hatch, et al.). The attacks on her for mis-handling the Blasey-Ford matter however, are simply a case of Republicans finding it not politically expedient to go after Dr. Blasey-Ford and choosing the next best available woman to rake over the coals.
5
Feinstein could have revealed the accusation before the confirmation hearings started without revealing the source. And she could have revealed it in her one-on-one with Kavanaugh, stressing to him that true or false, once the allegation leaked out that he would be reviled by at least half the population and that his and his family's lives would be turned upside down. In short, she could have given him the chance to bow out. And if he had done that the accuser's anonymity would have been protected.
By delaying, Feinstein has put the confirmation process in a tail spin, further fractured our already divided country, and exposed both the accuser and accused AND their families' (all innocent) to harrassments and death threats.
In short, Feinstein bungled this one.
5
You would hope the NYT would have the journalistic integrity to quote Feinstein accurately in context. What Feinstein said was not, "I can't say everything's true," as though doubting Dr. Ford. She said, "I can't say everything's true; I don't know," expressing agnosticism, which is reasonable given that there has been no investigation or hearing yet. It would've been better for her to say nothing, but at least she is not jumping to the conclusions of partisan members on both sides whose last priority seems to be truth. Their actions work against justice rather than on its behalf, for all parties involved. If I were Dr. Ford, I would not expect or want people to rush to judgment even on my behalf before even hearing and carefully considering my story and weighing its truthfulness. It cheapens it rather than being respectful of it by instrumentalizing it as part of a political and social process where people choose sides largely based on other factors and general impressions rather than attention to her particular case.
Senator Feinstein has faced withering criticism and political opposition before, locally and nationally; although she may have botched what might be her final battle, she will always have my respect. There does seem to be a disconnect with regards to this initial request for confidentiality from Dr. Blasey, though. Perhaps in the future, a Congressperson faced with a similar situation should tell the correspondent that there should be no expectation of stopping a process behind a screen of anonymity, and if that is insisted on, their letter will go into the shredder. You can't have it both ways.
1
It was a VERY difficult decision for Sen. Feinstein--protecting the confidentiality of her constituent vs. doing what she finally did by referring the matter to the F.B.I. The real issue that concerns me, a professional psychologist, is whether or not she consulted with Dr. Blasey Ford before making the referral that led to her identity being known. Democrats want a full frontal attack on Judge Kavanaugh; conservatives want no delay in confirming him, so Sen. Feinstein has no supporters. She may have acted improperly and now placed Dr, Blasey Ford in a life-threatening situation. If so, Sen. Feinstein deserves condemnation for violating a person's expressed wish for confidentiality. Now the focus needs to be not on Donald Trump, Dianne Feinstein or Brett Kavanaugh, but on support for Dr. Blasey Ford in providing her a safe--both physically and psychologically--venue to tell her story. So far, it sadly appears that the U.S. Senate is not that place.
The big problem with the confidentiality of the accuser in this case, is that in these circumstance, at this level and especially given the Senators experience in Washington, it is nearly absurd to the point of being disconnected with reality for Feinstein or anyone involved the not only think but even entertain the remotest possibility that a once this accusation was put down on paper that there would be even the remotest possibility in this day and age of her name not becoming public.
2
So let me get this right:
Senator Feinstein could not allow the two ranking Republican members of the Judiciary Committee to know about Dr. Blasey's accusation lest that not honor her request for anonymity, but she could ask the Senate Ethics Committee if Dr. Blsey could have a special counsel look into her accusation?
Well, seems to me there's your leak. Apparently the Ethics Committee is undertaking unethical leaks, and Senator Feinstein is the one responsible for giving them that information. And now apparently the accuser herself is perfectly okay with this leaking as long as it didn't come out, say, three months ago.
4
Senator Feinstein acted appropriately and with deliberation given the circumstances.
Someone recommended to fill a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court has been accused of raping a 15-year girl and causing her to fear for her life. The witness is credible and has passed a lie detector test.
On the other hand, the nominee has perjured himself while under oath with respect to his role in torture during the Bush administration, itself disqualifying.
He infamously said “what happens at Georgetown stays at Georgetown” and has refused to take a lie detector test to refute the charges.
This is not even close. Kavanaugh is not Supreme Court material- not by a long shot.
2
@David Parsons, there is no accusation of rape. There is an accusation of either attempted rape or sexual assault, although it is unclear as to whether there is enough evidence for a Maryland prosecutor to go forward (since apparently there is no statue of limitations for this matter in Maryland). The allegations state that clothes remained on both parties the entire time.
Perhaps America and especially California would benefit from a pair of new senators.
Surely there is a current crop of California progressives for the 21st century that can carry the torches for the golden state.
After all of these decades of service from each, both Feinstein and Pelosi have earned the right to nice retirement parties.
5
I voted for Kevin DeLeon in the primary frankly because we need stronger resistance to DJT and the extremists in the Republican Party. But, I very strongly disagree with the left wing public criticism of Sen Feinstein. She didn’t create or condone any of the problems associated with the nominee and she respected the victims wishes. Liberals and progressives should stop “ eating their young” . Take a page out of the oppositions play book and be loyal to your own.
A modest suggestion for Diane: Ask Kavanaugh if he is willing to take a lie detector test. Ford apparently took and passed one. If he declines, we will know that Ford is telling the truth.
Senator Feinstein:
-said Trump could turn out to be a good president;
-voted to extend unlimited warrantless wiretapping powers to Trump, actively obstructing some Democrats who wanted some minor changes to the law to protect Americans;
-voted with Republicans to end debate on Gorsuch;
-apologized to Kavanaugh that he experienced protests;
-kept THE letter secret even from other Democrats;
-told her colleagues to focus on Kavanaugh's legal opinions not his character;
-ignored a hand-delivered letter from an attorney who said several federal employees had approached him with information relevant to Kavanaugh's nomination.
-worked with Grassly to set up a hearing of the letter writer to happen quickly.
Feinstein is not only not resisting, she is aiding and abetting.
3
Her generation did great things back in their day, but the sense of entitlement of that generation is staggering. They implemented financial policies that cemented their hold on wealth and since them next generations have been worse off then the generations before reversing a trend since WWII in which each generation left the next generation with a better financial prospect. They hold on to power as a lifetime appointment and both in politics and advocacy groups they "eat their young" rather than build up a next generation of leadership. After her performance with Trump about a year back after a mass shooting in which she reacted with unconcealed glee to the Liar in Chief indicated that he might do something on gun control, it was blatantly evident that it is was past her time to retire.
4
Senator Feinstein is "at 85 the oldest member of the Senate..." and "When, for example, one reporter asked Ms. Feinstein as she entered the Senate on Monday evening if she had had any discussions with Dr. Blasey after receiving the letter, the senator could not recall."
With all due respect to the Senator and for her service, never have I seen a better argument made for term limits. She's had a career in the Senate worthy of a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. This is just not good for our system and leads to the corruption and partisanship that are our present plague. If she wants to make a lasting contribution to the future of the Country, start that legislation and end career politicians.
5
Perhaps Senator Feinstein thought along these lines for the weeks that she kept the letter secret & during which her staff was in touch with Dr. Ford:
- Dr. Ford cannot i.d. the scene of the assault
- Dr. Ford cannot remember how she got to or from the party, but at 15 someone else would have driven her
- Dr. Ford did not tell anyone including her parents about the assault until 2012 in a therapy session and even then did not name names and claims the therapist made an error in her notes (4 guys instead of 2)
- Were the 2 guys waiting atop the stairs or did they, falling down drunk as per her claim, accompany her up the stairs as she was headed to the bathroom?
- Did she shout for help when forced into the bedroom?
- The party was downstairs but the 2nd guy turns up the music in the empty bedroom she was forced into (music already playing in empty bedroom)
- Was she also drinking/drunk?
- Why did she not tell her best friend(s) and warn them to steer clear of Kavanaugh and his friends?
- etc.
Sexual assault should never be condoned, and the horrible days of women who have suffered assault and rape hesitating to report the event are, sadly, not behind us. However, it is not fair to accuse someone 35 years after an event when you can't even i.d. the scene of the crime, and say you want to remain anonymous.
From the #metoo standpoint, Senator Feinstein mishandled this situation. From the #resist standpoint she did not.
8
I personally think Senator Feinstein has handled this appropriately. Those who speak against her about age, etc. fail to recognize that she is one of the most intelligent Senators in Congress.
1
No private business would have 80 year olds (Grassley, Hatch, Feinstein) running it unless that person owned the company
These Senators do not own the Senate - just because your constituents will re-elect you does not mean at some point you cannot have the grace to retire
Good luck to California having its interests represented by someone who will be 91 if she lives out her next term
7
The powers-that-be can spin this anyway they want. As far as I am concerned, Senator Feinstein did the right thing. Just as with Dr. Ford, I will support her. Do people not see that this is yet another deflection triggered from the Right to get the heat off of "their man" and onto, instead, God forbid, an individual who had the audacity to be born a smart, assertive woman?
Please let's pull back on all things Feinstein. We are playing right into the old boys' club manipulative and misogynistic hands. Let us stop feeding this tainted fodder that sustains them. They are gluttons of deceit, from Trump on down.
1
She is getting older and there is some deep and unsavory "swampiness" involving her husband and his real estate deals (what is it with these billionaire real estate developers, be it Trump or Richard Blum) but I think still probably prefer Feinstein over DeLeon.
What I found inexcusable is how Obama refused to bring accountability to CIA Director John Brennan after the CIA violated their agreement with Feinstein and the Senate Intelligence Oversight Committee during the torture investigation. And then Brennan brazenly lied about this violation and the CIA spying on the Senate. And now Brennan is lionized by what used to be the "Left" and given a platform by CNN (the real Left, the old Left would never have celebrated this kind of national security state abuse). This was well before Trump but shows how this country has perhaps been all along more like Russia than we want to admit.
I hope Dianne Feinstein at least had some very choice words for President Obama in private over this matter. Would have been better if Obama had followed President Kennedy's example and fired Brennan, the way Kennedy fired Allen Dulles after the CIA shenanigans and misrepresentations involving Bay of Pigs.
2
I am confused: So what is everyone saying?
Whenever a woman makes an accusation against a man she is always to be unquestionably believed? Or when a liberal woman levels a charge (however vague and lacking in detail or corroboration) against a conservative white man she must always be believed? I am shocked at the people who have announced publicly "I believe her" when they have never really heard from her or heard her story, except as filtered through one letter by a Stanford connected attorney, with minimal information. Do we really want to set this as the precedent for how the business of law is conducted in our country?
14
All part of the long-standing Republican "strategy": attack, attack, smear, smear...
The point ISN'T Feinstein's "motivations" or those of Christine Blasey Ford. It's that there's plausible cause to think Kavanaugh did attempt sexual assault, and the right-wing is again trying to shift the focus.
They got away with this with Clarence Thomas and countless other nominees and have smirched countless people -- politicians, victims, and parents of veterans -- who have the effrontery to stand up to them.
1
She’s a fox. She’s also one of my senators. Nothing to see here. Dianne is going to be re-elected by a wide margin.
Feinstein was not being deferential to Kavanaugh, but to Doctor Blasey. Given the circumstances of this case, something that happened so long ago and knowing how she would be treated Feinstein handled it as best she could.
Senator Feinstein did a disservice to her colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, Judge Kavanaugh, and Dr. Ford. She could have provided the unredacted letter to the FBI, advising that the accuser wants to be anonymous. The FBI could have followed up with Dr. Ford and others listed in her letter, compiled all of the evidence and accounts, and presented it to the Judiciary Committee for review. This would have given the Committee members adequate information to question Kavanaugh about the allegations in closed door meetings. Instead a Democratic staffer with access to the letter leaked it to the Press at the 11th hour throwing Dr. Ford unwittingly into the spotlight as well as sending the entire confirmation process into chaos.
Feinstein deserves every ounce of criticism she receives. She should have either forwarded the letter as soon as she received it (with permission of the author) or buried it (if she did not receive permission). Doing what she did is appalling, and as politically naive as it gets. She has given the republicans all the ammunition they need to dismiss Ford's charge.
Kavanaugh should not be confirmed, but if democrats want that result, they need to win elections and ask their 85-year-old colleagues who can't get the job done (which is nothing new for Feinstein) to step aside.
California's election system has resulted in another better-qualified democrat to be on the ballot - the time to step away is today.
4
Why is your newspaper describing Feinstein as "under siege." The woman has a fine moral compass, and she used it to keep a promise to another person even though doing so hurt her cause. I think she thinks she's on the right track with her actions. I certainly think she is. She made no mistake by holding the letter. Time is not of the essence here, and we deserve a justice of superior moral character, which Kavanaugh is not looking like right now.
And why are you calling Dr. Ford "the accuser." Do you realize how inflammatory -- and demeaning -- this language is to all women?
The NYT continues its negative portrayal of Feinstein. I highly doubt that she was "bewildered by the swirl of attention". Here in California she maintains the respect and support of the majority of Democrats.
This is absurd. Senator Feinstein handled this poorly. If Mrs. Ford didn’t want her identity revealed and did not want her allegation publicized, then why did she send the letter in the first place? This is dirty politics disguised as a courageous act. Real courage requires Mrs. Ford to follow through on her claim and to testify before the committee soon.
What did Mrs. Ford think was going to happen? She wanted to make a charge against Mr. Kavanaugh but she didn’t want anyone but the Senator to know about it? Who is she kidding? Mrs. Ford wanted someone, perhaps everyone, to take notice. If she truly didn’t want attention, she may have chosen instead to keep the matter between herself and her therapist.
At this point, Senator Feinstein is engaged in a political powerplay using Mrs. Ford as a pawn. Since when does telling the truth require courage? Because the accuser is afraid she won’t be believed? Nonsense.
If she is telling the truth she should be brave enough to do what is necessary to prove it, instead of allowing her lawyers to game the system as they have so far, aided and abetted by Senator Feinstein and her supporters. She has a right to be heard but she should have something substantive and compelling to back her claims.
Hiding in the shadows is craven and undermines her credibility. Mrs. Ford should speak the truth with confidence and stop hiding. Living in fear that no one will believe her is no longer an option.
3
This is perfect deflection; the Republicans have that market cornered. Let's blame the messenger, not worry about the message.
An eighty-five year old, fifth term senator is about as far from change (or progress) as it gets.
5
So, Senator Feinstein does a pretty good job of dishing back what the GOP dishes out. Uses their tactics. They can't stand it. Not only is she a female doing it, she's an older female. Oh, the horrors!
Beat 'em at their own game, Senator Feinstein!
I wish I lived in California so I could vote for her.
Seems to me there is no comparison with the Anita Hill case. Clarence Thomas was not a drunken high-schooler. He was a highly-regarded 40-something head of the EEOC who should have known better, and the offenses went on for a loooong period of time, like TWO YEARS!
Feinstein very poorly judged this case and committed unforced errors both on Dr. Ford and a group of federal employees asking to testify about Kavanaugh. She ignored the latter in a revelation in the news of September 17th:
ATTORNEY SENT LETTER TO CHUCK GRASSLEY AND DIANNE FEINSTEIN CLAIMING FEDERAL COURT EMPLOYEES WILLING TO SPEAK ABOUT BRETT KAVANAUGH
by Ryan Grim
We should hear these court employees. Their testimony goes to Kavanaugh's behavior and lies he may have told.
The Times should report on this. I've not yet seen mention of it here.
Feinstein has been behind on key issues these past couple of years. It's time Kevin de Leon took the baton.
---
Things Trump (and Congress) Did While You Weren't Looking
https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-2ZW
4
Come on, Bret Kavanuagh supporters: If he is such great choice for this position of becoming our next Supreme Court Justice, why is it unthinkable to slow down the confirmation and take time to have an FBI, non-partisan, investigation into Dr. Blasey's allegations about BK's alleged sexual assault? If what BK says is true, that he did not commit this assault, then why is he also not wanting to have a more thorough investigation by the FBI to help clear this allegation from his record? What is the rush, if indeed BK is speaking the truth?
32
@Patti Bezzo
Come on, Patti! Judge Kavanaugh has already been investigated by the FBI five or six times; before he was appointed to every federal judicial position he has held an investigation occurred.
Are we really going to hold federal appointee's responsible for their behavior thirty plus years ago while in high school? If this is not simply a last ditch effort by the rabid liberal left to deny a highly qualified conservative jurist a seat on the Supreme Court... then God help us all.
@Patti Bezzo. Investigate what? She can’t remember ant facts. Dems had her letter in July, why the stall?
Great. First Christine Blasey Ford's cognitive abilities are questioned, now Senator Feinstein's are. Even the reporting on the denigration of women denigrates them.
For women in the public eye it remains damned if you do, damned if you don't.
37
@Subito
No.
An 85 year old male Senator who had never worked in the private sector and been in government work and politics continuously for 60 years would be under the same scrutiny.
It's not a gender issue and really not an age issue either.
It's that career politicians like Feinstein live in the bubble so long that they lose touch and can no longer serve effectively.
Absent term limits we are relying on these people to exit gracefully when the time comes but a lot of them just won't do it.
This is a big problem.
1
Seems to me she plays a mean hand of poker. The repubs can go lick their wounds. She won this round and that is more than the other dems managed. Decorum be damned.
27
Ms Feinstein used to be a firebrand. Her style has changed considerably. However, whenever I write to her, she has the answers to my questions. In this case she handled the Blaseley letter with restraint and respect. Wisdom comes with age. It takes enormous courage whenever a victim of sexual misconduct comes forward. They need support and if they don't get it, they frequently withdraw. So we should focus on Kavanaugh. We should focus on Trump who is now trivializing Dr Blaseley's letter. I don't doubt this story for a minute. Those who feel the need to make ageist comments about Senator Feinstein should consider that they are only helping Team Kavanaugh.
71
Dianne Feinstein handed this in her usual oh-so-proper patrician manner. Unfortunately we are not living in patrician times......
9
Let's see, have you got all the Republican talking points in the article? Mishandling the letter? Attacked by her own party and paper? Looking guilty by her poor defense? Etc. Etc. Yup, The Times has regurgitated them all. When you want to look impartial and can't do your own work it's always better to let the Republican spin machine do it for you. That's the modern New York Times. Paper of record no more.
13
I don't believe the accuser.
15
@NYC Dweller
I do believe her. I believe what she remembers. I'm withholding judgment about whether what she remembers actually happened as she remembers it.
My wife and I have been talking about quite a few instances where our memories or those of our friends have been verifiably mistaken. People come up to you at reunions and tell stories you know didn't happen. My brother-in-law felt guilty all his life for causing an accident involving his cousin. He finally got around to asking his uncle about it and was told he had nothing to do with it, wasn't even around. Memory is a funny thing.
I don't doubt for a second that something traumatic happened. But I have also learned that one person's trauma is another person's "so what". This combined with memory can produce some strange results.
11
@NYC Dweller, how can you know one way or the other? It's unknowable. It was 36 or 37 years ago and none of us were in the room, if it happened or did not. The accuser has not even testified under oath yet; nor has Kavanaugh on this issue. We should all withhold our judgment and see if there are any other facts.
1
Feinstein is forgiven if some political calculations were involved. It's the least McConnell & Co deserve after Garland episode. Take your medicine Mitch!
13
Never been a huge fan of Senator Feinstein.
She's the Democrat's version of GOP senators like Flake and Corker, they like to indulge in palatable, plausibly sounding "bi-partisan" pablum which inevitably leads to absolutely nothing.
She's been very successful in maintaining her reputation
over the years but she's always seemed to me to be over her head and this situation is no exception.
She flat out mishandled this.
23
Since the Merrick Garland affair, Republicans have believed that they are the only ones allowed to throw curve balls when it comes to the Supreme Court game. Sorry, guys! You better be prepared to hit as well as pitch. What Senator Feinstein did took a lot of guts, but it pointed out what so many of us already knew - that this hearing was a sham. A purely perfunctory affair with the outcome never in doubt. By bringing this to bear at the 11th hour, she had given both the judge and the Republicans on the committee every opportunity to legitimize themselves. It never happened! She played her trump card only when she had to. And, boy, was it a doozy!
31
We haven't forgotten the Bork and Thomas character assassination..for ideological reasons.
Ginsburg,Kagan,Sotomayor have views antithetical to conservatives, yet they confirmed and not slimed.. Garland didn't get a fair deal,true but again his character wasnt dragged though the cess pool.
1
Ms. Feinstein has denied that she calculated much of anything — she was simply honoring Dr. Blasey’s wish for privacy.
Then take it up with Kavanaugh privately. Jeez, all this proves is that Trump is hardly the only politician in Washington who lies through their teeth all the time. When the Democrats reduced themselves to the level of Republicans when it comes to smear, they bring with it to themselves all the other undesirable attributes of that level.
7
"Under siege"?
Welcome to politics as usual. Or are we looking at a double standard?
5
It's such a shock to the Republicans that someone would actually listen to a voter's request to not publish the letter ahead of her wishes. The would have shared the letter with glee ahead of time.
20
At the pinnacle of her career Sen. Feinstein truly represents the Democrats strategy of “obfuscate and resist”. A worthy Senator would have immediately handed over the accusation for review by the appropriate authorities. Not sit on it waiting to make ‘last minutes news”.
17
@Peter I Berman
Sure, Peter, she was given something in confidence, kept it private per the agreement, but she should have broken her promise because that's somehow honorable.
I take it that if anyone confides in you, and you agree to keep it to yourself, that it's OK to simply turn around and blab to someone else the nature of the conversation?
you're a real standup guy, Peter!
I’d like to remind everyone that another Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, was completely ignored. Prior to his nomination, 125 days was the record length of time between nomination and confirmation. Merrick Garland’s nomination languished for 293 days before it expired. Mitch McConnell et. al. cited non-existent providence in which “lame duck” presidents’ nominations for such appointments were typically not taken to vote...failing to note that the “lame duck” period is the time between the election of a new president in November and inauguration rather than the entire final year of a presidency. When you behave in the way the GOP did in that situation, you have to be prepared to get as good as you gave. This is relatively minor compared the the Garland situation, and the GOP deserves to have this nomination derailed by gamesmanship. They did this to themselves...just a Donald Trump is mired in this investigation after making a life out of unfairly tearing down his detractors...which included a phony media campaign which baselessly questioned his predecessor’s citizenship.
28
Bless her; may she be in the Senate forever.
15
“President Trump, Dr. Blasey Ford did not want her story of sexual assault to be public,” Ms. Feinstein wrote Wednesday on Twitter...This is one of the dumbest statements being paraded in the media about this case. IF "Dr. Blasey Ford did not want her story...to be public", why did she send the letter? Only someone who is naive or stupid buys a desire for privacy being used to make Dr. Blasey Ford appear as an innocent apolitical player in all this. We Americans need to grow up, out of our political adolescence.
12
In the Anita Hill case there was an FBI investigation that was part of the reopened background check. Law enforcement regularly receives confidential information and tips. Dr Blasey wanted to give this type of law enforcement tip so it would be part of the background check and not something public.
2
Feinstein played her assigned role in a really strange script. What did Ms. Ford expect would happen when she sent her letter and requested anonymity?
"Dear Ms. Ford,
Thank you for your recent correspondence. We always enjoy hearing from our constituents about any issues they might have.
Sincerely,
Dianne"
8
Feinstein doesn't work for the victim, she works for us. Chuck Grassley ran over Feinstein like she was nothing. We need a fighter in the seat. Kevin DeLeon for Senator.
5
@Keith … not true
If there is a new FBI investigation of the Kavanaugh confirmation, it ought to start with one of Senator Dianne Feinstein and Ford’s Congressional legislator and their staffs. Americans need to find out whether the leak of Ford’s then anonymous letter and her name during the hearings was intended to interfere or disrupt the hearing process, as with any organized protest demonstration in the hearing room, which is illegal.
10
@Bayou Houma
I love your comment, Bayou - I can file it right next to those who are upset that she *DIDN'T* reveal the existence of the letter (because she had agreed to keep it private).
Senator Feinstein had this letter in her possession when she met privately with Judge Kavanaugh. She knew then that she would use the information pertained in the letter to adversely affect his confirmation. This was totally dishonest and sneaky. The right thing to do was to have brought it to the attention of the senate judiciary committee and they could have addressed this directly with Judge Kavanaugh during the four days of hearings. She set out to get Mr. Kavanaugh and this was a last ditched effort to keep him off the bench.
Never mind that Dr. Ford's memory was fuzzy about very important facts involving this sexual abuse and there was no definite proof of Judge Kavanaugh's involvement. None of that mattered. Senator Feinstein did not want him to be our next Supreme Court justice and would do almost anything to prevent this from happening.
Why hasn't she given a copy of this letter to the Republicans as they have requested numerous times? Is she hiding something. Judge Kavanaugh has an impeccable record and is of an excellent caliber. He will be confirmed in spite of Senator Feinstein's devious ways. I hope she is soon voted out of office. She does not deserve to serve the people.
16
@WPLMMT My respect for Diane Feinstein is gone. Yup, she's a politician who wants to be reelected.
2
@WPLMMT
Gee, did you even read this article?!! She honored the request of Ford to not disclose it, but in keeping her word, this makes her the evil monster you make her out to be?
Please tell your friends to never depend on YOU to keep something private, since you obviously believe that NOT keeping your word is fine, dandy, and somehow honorable.
Senator Feinstein's big mistake was intimating a letter existed for weeks without Dr. Ford's deciding to move forward and then taking much too much time to take action. When, exactly, did Dr. Ford contact Senator Feinstein or did Senator Feinstein contact Dr. Ford first?
This does not diminish Dr. Ford's allegations but it does diminish Senator Feinstein's handling and stature.
9
How could Feinstein have handled this so badly? Critical information was held for 6 weeks and only surfaces as the confirmation hearing was about to wind up. Suspicion is an understatement. Feinstein hijacked the #MeToo movement for purely political motives. If Feinstein cared at all about the accuser or the accused she would have notified the committee in a timely fashion. She would have followed proper procedure. We have an accuser calling for an FBI investigation of an event that she can't remember the exact place or time and she thinks it may have been when she was 15. Senator Feinstein should have advised the accuser that her recollection of the facts were woefully inadequate. But no, Feinstein threw her into the arena unprepared, ill-equipped, and terribly short on factual evidence. To what end? It matters little if the hearing is delayed because there is no moral justification for Feinstein's actions.
12
You complain about factual inaccuracy and then rely on factual inaccuracy that supports your view. She followed proper procedure and the request of the victim even though it would have better served her political purpose to disclose it as soon as it was received.
Additionally you may want to read a little about the trauma and impact on the victim before asserting Feinstein should have told her her story was "woefully inadequate".
This is all GOP political nonsense. Feinstein knows whats what she is doing.
11
Did Dr Ford really think that an anonymous letter in itself would derail the nomination? Public testimony follow up not needed?
15
"President Trump said on Tuesday. “Why didn’t she bring it up? Why didn’t the Democrats bring it up then? Because they obstruct and because they resist.” "
This from a Precedent who can't fire people in person, but needs Twitter and leaks to the press to do it. Give me a break.
Our Precedent wouldn't know what an "honest broker" is.
Trump should recall what obstruct and resist really looks like when nominating a Supreme Ct. justice and other Federal judges - McConnell can fill him in, since he hasn't a clue.
6
"Ms. Feinstein has denied that she calculated much of anything — she was simply honoring Dr. Blasey’s wish for privacy."
Nonsense. In accepting a letter which was essentially a time bomb and didn't serve any rightful purpose, Ms. Feinstein showed her true colors - a master manipulator. The appropriate response would have been to return the letter to sender, with instructions on how to pursue this in civil court. Period. She has no standing to act on the complaint.
That said, she could have brought this to attention on the FBI immediately. She didn't. She held on to it for purely political/manipulative purposes, and when the democrats saw the confirmation of Mr. Kauvanaugh as inevitable, out it came as a Haily Mary.
While I have no reason to agree or disagree whether the alleged crime actually occurred, I do question the maturity and judgment of a woman who goes running to congress with a time bomb in her hands, dump it in someone's lap, and essentially hold them hostage for "confidentially." No reasonable person would think it could ever be kept confidential.
36
@Factumpactum
Senator Feinstein broke with political (and rational )etiquette. She had a duty to immediately inform the Judiciary Committee about the letter from Dr. Ford which she received on July 30th, instead of hiding it from public view. Dr.Ford had no right to request the letter to be kept confidential from the public. Ford was being devious here. While I don't want to see Kavanaugh--a highly qualified judge-- confirmed to the SCOTUS because he is too far right wing in an already ideologically polarized court, as a Democrat, I find Feinstein's behavior in this matter to be completely inappropriate. Also, why shouldn't Kavanagh be in the same room with Ford when she testifies before the committee. Shouldn't the accused have a right to confront his accuser. Both should hear each other's testimony, face to face.
SenatorFeinstein has behaved sensibly and honorably in a difficult situation. She was given information, but not really given it if the informant was unwilling to come forward. If she had spoken about it, it would have been considered innuendo. She respected the right of the woman involved to make her own decision about this, a foreign concept to some of her detractors, especially the Republicans who can't wait to get Kavanaugh on the court in order to abrogate women's rights to abortion. There are many troubling aspects to this, not the least how long ago it occurred. If he was drunk Judge Kavanaugh may not remember it, but the damage still exists to the person involved. What does it show about his attitude toward women now? I think we know that from his stance on abortion, he knows best what women should do.
72
@Dianne Karls:You say Ford was 'was unwilling to come forward'? then why did she come forward at the end?. It's all a scam orchestrated by somebody probably by the pro-choice crowd and the Democrats. Doesn't this smell really bad and the lady is a highly educated professional so she was not naive. I'm starting to believe in the deep state all the more. They don't like a very rich non politician breaking up their Washington party - they'll get him out of office soon.
7
@Larry - Boy, I sure hope you're right, Larry. Hey, Deep State, if you're out there, please get rid of Mr. Trump "soon" ( sooner the better) like Larry says.
1
@Rick:Yeah Rick lets get back to real politicians like Obama who campaigned If you remember to withdraw all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and end NSA spying on us. You remember? he restarted those wars and new ones in Libya, Syria and Yemen - NSA he strengthened the Patriot act. You remember? that's what you want back?
People need to take a breath and look at the big picture. Yes, the victim came forward early on in the process but wanted to remain anonymous. Senator Feinstein respected that perhaps with the thought that Judge Kavanaugh would self-destruct with more lies like those he used in his earlier confirmations. He goes down and a vulnerable person's identity no longer has to be revealed or her life ruined. Take a breath and give thought to some pretty reasonable possibilities.
29
@Okiegopher
It is only reasonable if you believe the only reason the letter should be made public is to stop Judge Kavanaugh from getting on to the Supreme court.
If you believe the letter is true than the judge shouldn't be any type of judge .
Withholding the truth because you think he would self destruct acknowledges that this letter was written only to stop Kavanaugh from getting on to the Supreme court.
DOES THAT SOUND REASONABLE TO YOU.
.
3
@Okiegopher
It's blackmail.
My teen daughter tried something analogous, with the best of intentions. "Mom, Katie and Esme are cutting/drinking/etc. in school. But you can't say anything, they will get into trouble!!!"
Ms. Feinstein would have kept quiet.
In an effort to be a responsible parent, I explained why I couldn't keep that information private, and immediately informed the school psychologist. It wasn't my job to tell the parents, it WAS my responsibility to ensure there was as responsible person - with training - to handle the situation. Ms. Feinstein should have done the same. But no, she saw a potential weapon and wanted to hold on to it.
9
I have voted for Feinstein in the past, and would do so again. Her years of service give her wisdom many of her critics cannot comprehend, let alone criticize with any credibility.
In my life the one common theme of the Democratic Party is that it seems to find a way to lose when it should win, and often these losses can by attributed to unforced errors by self-righteous ideologues who care more about being right than about winning. If these people had just shut up and voted in 2016 we would have a Democrat in the White House, Garland, not Gorsuch and someone other than the current frat boy nominee for SCOTUS.
30
exactly.
3
Republicans are caught in a bear trap and have no option but to gnaw their collective leg off to get free. They, old white men all, either destroy their standing with women voters by preemptively confirming a man accused of attempted rape with no real investigation, or they delay the confirmation process until after the election with a substantive investigation, or they convince Trump to withdraw the Kavanaugh nomination, all terrible options for them. Of course they're taking it out on Feinstein. In my estimation she behaved correctly in all this. She was honor bound by a promise to protect Blasey's confidentiality until such time as her confession began to leak out despite her silence. Turning the letter over to the FBI to investigate was a brilliant move. The longer this cooks, the greater the chance that high school yearbooks reveal other witnesses to Kavanaugh's character, although the elite class has historically stuck together to protect each other from accountability for their collective foibles and crimes.
19
Jack, " old white men all" is what liberals use as they condemn racist and sexist language according to their own politically correct lexicon. Your choice of language is "ignorant liberal. "
9
@Jack
A investigation based solely on a letter that was kept secret should not be a reason to start a investigation.
Ms Ford should go on public record to acknowledge that she is making these accusations and give some kind of explanation why after thirty years she wrote the letter now otherwise this investigation just becomes a witch hunt.
I agree one of the reasons she does not testify is because she believed other women would back up her story.
This just proves to me that her story isn't credible because if it was she would testify now and the investigation should not be held.
Attacks on Sen Feinstein are attempts to change the subject.
47
Feinstein’s actions are a thumb in the eye of Republicans. Just the beginning of payback for Merrick Garland.
17
Our Senators, House Representatives, President, and other elected officials are an embarrassment to our country. The committee is supposed to be voting for a Supreme Court justice; instead, we have this sordid, disgusting matter being played out for all the world to see. Have you people no shame? There is no possible way any proud American can feel anything but shame and disgust for our nation because of these people.
17
Senator Feinstein is not be the issue with this nomination.
The issue is this Kavanuagh has been accused of attempted rape. It's bad enough that we have a proud sexual predator in the WH. Do we really want an accused rapist on the Supreme Court?
52
What on earth is meant by the Times' locution, "cleaned up", as regards Sen. Feinstein's characterization of Dr. Blasey's note:
"[Sen. Feinstein stated,] “I can’t say everything’s truthful” in Dr. Blasey’s account. She later _cleaned up the remark_..."
Do the Times writers mean to have us believe that Sen. Feinstein's characterization was _dirty_?
Morally unfit?
Very odd, given that:
1. Sen. Feinstein has an excellent reputation for truthfulness, calm and accuracy in her public statements, and
2. Aside from Rep. Anna Eshoo, Sen. Feinstein appears to be the only elected public official to date who has seen the full, unredacted text of Dr. Blasey's note.
Could it be that Sen. Feinstein's "unclean[sed]" remarks were expressing a simple truth?
Isn't it likely that an accuser's claims - made 36 years later, with zero evidence and no corroborating testimony, and multiple contradictions - will contain at least some things that are not true?
Why on earth are we bringing the Obama administration's disastrous campus rape tribunal shams - the kangaroo courts that have resulted in scores of young men being unfairly accused and punished for assaults they did not commit, with no due process and no way to recover their shattered reputations and careers?
End this madness.
Stop destroying this country's bedrock principles of fairness and due process.
No more trials-by-Twitter.
No more kangaroo courts.
22
@T-Bone
I agree, T-Bone, campus rape never,ever occurs, so let's get rid of those kangaroo courts now!
All those college boys accused of rape - all of them, are innocent.
It's very intriguing and disappointing to know that if I were to say "You raped me" or "you touched me" or 20 years ago, I think "you drugged me", that the world would believe me. Disgusting! C'mon, let's get the facts....(democrats) or anyone else that could possibly be this ignorant!
12
@Trix Democrats want the facts, hence the request for the FBI investigation and more witnesses at the hearing. It's Republicans who do not want to know what really happened.
1
It is so ridiculous that Senator Feinstein would be facing any criticism at all for not bringing these allegations to light at a time that was more convenient for Republicans on the Judiciary Committee when it was Ms. Blasey Ford’s desire from the beginning that none of this be made public. Perhaps Senator Feinstein wanted to make sure that the accusation was credible prior to bringing it to the attention of the committee. Whatever the case, whether she waited until the last minute or not for whatever reason, it doesn’t change the fact that Ms. Blasey Ford had accused Judge Kavanaugh of a despicable attempt at raping her, and any accusation of any impropriety should be investigated fully prior to holding a vote for any appointment within government, especially a lifetime position upon The Supreme Court of the United States which is arguably the most important appointment within our government. It is completely immoral, improper, and irresponsible not to look into this matter fully for however long it may take, and it is fully sickening that any senator or the president to dismiss her claims and imply she is lying...however cleverly they say it. These Republican Senator’s need to be held accountable by every woman and man in whatever state they represent and vote out of office for their complete lack of integrity.
22
As I understand it, she had this letter for six weeks. The timing of the letter and the charade of demanding an FBI investigation all point to delay tactics as being the real motivation. Feinstein has been a decent Senator for California but this is pure, nasty politics aimed to delay Kavenaugh's vote until after the election in the hopes that the Democrats control the Senate. It has nothing to do with the truth and everything to do with politics. Those who do not see this are fools, and those who think that Feinstein is not playing cynical politics are the greater fools.
14
@Jason McDonald –
seems it's the Rs who want nothing to do with the truth, otherwise why are they are afraid to investigate further?
He's apparently perjured himself about other matters – that ought to be enough for him to take his name out of consideration.
Is it really okay with you if we end up with a known liar on the SC?
2
@Sally B She has the letter for six weeks, and sits on it. The accuser has not provided a date or location. No other credible people have come forward. There is no FBI jurisdiction. Exactly HOW is the FBI going to investigate this? Don't you think that Feinstein knows a little about how the FBI process works? It does not make sense if you actually think about it rather than just emotionally reacting to it.
@Jason McDonald I do not think Feinstein is playing politics. However, if she is, I admire her all the more for it. #GarlandPayback
3
Notice one thing about liberals: they reserve their most withering criticism for women, and always support men to replace or defeat them. Bernie Sanders over Hillary. Al Franken over Kerstin Gillibrand. David De Leon over Dianne Feinstein. The list is pretty long.
Why are liberals so vicious towards women in power?
4
@Mike, why does the right want to keep women out of power?
1
@Booksnoop Because they're misogynistic pigs. Now please answer my question.
Feinstein is emblematic of the Dem leadership -- old relics of a different era clinging desperately to power. She had a roll to play once, but her time has long, long passed.
7
harsh
1
@Oakwood
How would you describe the Republican leadership? They are old, white, Christian men representing the vision of white, male oligarchy laid out more than two centuries ago. And in this instance, they are circling together to protect another white man who has the same Father Knows Best vision of women and their rights.
Let’s have a real investigation here.
If there is truth in Dr Ford’s allegations, might we conclude that the drunken 17 year old has now matured into a man with refined legal opinions that reflect the same ideas that a woman has no real rights to control her body???
4
If an accusation comes to your attention, but the accuser is not willing to commit to following through by testifying or being deposed about the issue, you have nothing. I have been in this situation twice with employment-related issues while in a position of responsibility. The first time I went charging ahead with the issue and I was left hanging when the person decided not to "get involved" with the process to address the very issue they'd raised. The whole thing fell apart. The second time there was a problem (different issue), I'd learned my lesson and I moved at the pace and only to the extant that I knew accuser would follow through. Senator Feinstein could do nothing without an accuser willing to go on the record. I think she handled this correctly - including keeping this accusation from any other person until she actually had something that she could present.
24
@Diane Helle If someone is to blame, I am sorry nut this is only Dr. Ford: why did she write the letter and want to remain anonymous? She is an adult woman !
3
Spare us the outrage from the GOP. Guess they forgot about Merrick Garland.
37
@susan i think they don't care if they are consistent, or fair.
Trump has NOW weighed in, via super secret special Twitter. " If the attack was as bad as she's says, charges would have been filed ".
NOW, do you understand why Women do NOT come forward ??? When a self-admitted sexual abuser attacks the veracity of a victim ??? Senator Feinstein respected the privacy of this Woman. STOP insulting and questioning her. Seriously.
49
This whole situation is ridiculous. I was an early MeToo supporter and held get rid of a Board member at my company due to his abuse, but the whole movement has been hijacked and politicized by the extreme Left, and that is a shame.
We have a liberal California professor who has donated to the Democrats and has attended anti-Trump protests. She comes in, back in July with her story, but in concert with Feinstein, withholds it until the very last minute.
Not to mention these are 36 year old allegations against a then-minor who couldn't have even been charged at the time, with zero proof and nothing but her word. No stained dress. No rape kit. No text messages. No photos. No surveillance videos. No filed police report. No mention to parents.
No mention to her best friends at the time. Nothing but her story - and one in which she can't even specify the date and time.
Yet she comes in with preconditions and demands of the US government. What a farce.
Here's the deal given the circumstances. You tell your story under oath. You do it immediately. Otherwise, you're out. We're dealing with a respected United States Federal Appellate Judge here, not a repeat offender off the streets. You get to testify. He gets to testify. And we can take it from there.
28
@Jay Lincoln What about Mr. Judge, who Dr. Blasely Ford says was in the room? Shouldn't he be asked to testify, too?
2
These are the ones who make themselves look bad, not Sen Feinstein:
“An ambush attack,” said Senator John Thune of South Dakota. A “drive by,” said Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas.
Why do they think it's not worth the time to look into the allegations, no matter where they come from, or when, to try to get the truth?
Do we really want (another) liar on the SC?
And of course Ms Feinstein would honor Dr Ford's request to remain anonymous.
24
@Jay Lincoln
Mr. Lincoln: Like you, I support the Me Too movement, and I also think it has sometimes gone too far. But: Did it ever occur to you that back then there were no rape kits, no surveillance cameras, stained clothes, text messages? In those days a good girl thought it was her fault if anything happened to her. She was too ashamed to tell anyone, and no-one would believe her, from her parents to the police. How would you feel if this had happened to your wife, your sister, you daughter, and it only came out years later? Why is it that boys abused by priests who come forward many years later are believed, but not this woman? I don't know whether Judge Kavanaugh is innocent or guilty of this serious charge; I just think the American people deserve an unbiased investigation with subpoena power to compel witnesses to testify (Mr. Hodge has already refused). And since only President Trump can order an FBI investigation, it's probably not going to happen. He is already attacking Dr. Ford's veracity. This would be the best way for Prof. Ford to tell her story under oath and for Judge K to clear his name.
1
Another example about why I wonder about any skilled leader and politician under the age of 50 and familiar with the dominance of the social media era who wants to run to be dog catcher, let alone a Senator or POTUS.
2
Kevin de Leon needs to shut up and back off. His record of ignoring and shoving sexual harrassment charges in the California legislature disqualifies him for making any kind of statement on Feinstein and this matter. I would love to see a young democrat running for our Senator. However, given de Leon’s stance on this issue I’m going with Diane.
17
I’m sorry that Ms. Feinstein got played by the WaPo and Dr. Ford. I have voted for Ms. Feinstein for many, many years. I will not be played by her or Ms. Harris in concert with Dr. Ford as my vote will not be delayed or obstructed as this ruse on the Senate has been orchestrated.
10
Did the Anita Hill testimony change how Democrats treated Bill Clinton’s accusers?
11
Dianne Feinstein has served her constituents and our nation well over many years, and she deserves our respect. At 85 years of age, however, she is not at the top of her game.
Our Founding Fathers envisioned elected officials who would, after serving for a reasonable period of time, once again become private citizens. We now have altogether too many "career" politicians many of whom seem tethered to the past. Senators Grassley and Hatch, who have been on the Senate Judiciary Committee for at least a century, are saying the same kinds of things about Dr. Ford as they said about Anita Hill, as if they were cryogenically preserved for the 27 years that separated the two hearings.
We should consider term limits. At the very least, there should be a mandatory retirement age--how about 70?--for our elected officials.
14
As one of her constituents, I called her office and was treated like I was some kind of enemy, the staff wouldn’t even give me their names even though it’s a matter of public record! I was told to call her San Francisco office which doesn’t even allow you to leave a message. Has she represented me? Was anyone in her office even willing to hear my concerns? I would never vote for her. Not even against her opponent for that very reason and I’ve heard from others who’ve been treated poorly by her rather paranoid staff.
@JClouseau Chief Inspector, term limits are something to consider, but not the point, which is: this easy acceptance of victimisation has got to change. It's WAY past time for men to be in SUPPORT, and aid in the unbiased search for truth, and justice. For all. Remember?
Sincerely, a Panther lover
Feinstein did this by the book. She kept the letter confidential as the accuser requested. She also realized, correctly, that it would be very unfair to Kavanaugh to release an anonymous claim like this. One could argue that she should have let fellow Democrats on the committee know about it sooner - but that would risk that the letter's contents would have been more widely known or released by a staffer.
The Republicans differ on whether they want to know about this claim or don't want to know about it depending on the hour of the day.
What they are most definitely not interested in is the truth.
8
Diane Feinstein is one of my heroes. I voted for her in every one of the elections she ran in. She was in a no-win situation, with a letter containing serious allegations, from a victim who didn't want her identity known. The Old Boys Club in Congress were going to criticize her no matter what she did. If the terrible handling of Anita Hill helped to get a few women into their clubhouse, imagine what their terrible handling of Christine Blasey Ford could do? Of course they don't want her to testify, but I really hope she does. Or maybe she should just get interviewed on television, so she can tell her story without being harassed. I'm continually shocked at the way the Republicans in power are willing to ignore women's human rights. Maybe the key to that is their belief that assaulting women is normal.
3
Rep Feinstein is one more piece of evidence that age does more to diminish reputation than enhance it.
We need a constitutional amendment that would not allow people over 75 years old to stand for election, and force retirement of federal judges at the same age.
A geriocracy we see in the legislatures does not represent nor serve the country well.
13
@Lawrence – please get back to me when you're over 75 years old.
I ask this as someone over 75 years old.
Mental acuity varies by person; many younger people never even had it to lose.
1
@Sally B
OK
You are acknowledging implicitly that mental acuity does decrease with age and that it could be a problem.
Give me your solution.
Den Feinstein has been a right wing Democrat long enough. It’s time to send her home to San Francisco to live amongst her fellow surveillance industry million- and billionaires who have paid plenty to keep her in office over the years. She began her political career as an opportunist and hopefully it will end soon. I’m sorry, I simply do not believe her tale of maintaining confidentiality requiring total secrecy, while sitting on a bombshell. The bomb is now exploding and Sen Feinstein is sitting directly on top of it.
4
It was naive of both Dr. Blasey and Senator Feinstein to even think that such an accusation would remain anonymous from the get go.
That magical thinking informed all the following decisions and actions which have produced this mess. While I have no problem with Democrats playing hardball to give the GOP some much deserved aggravation, Senator Feinstein ought to know what will work and how it will play out given her years in DC.
The Chaos that has ensued could have been at least reduced if she had informed Dr. Blasey from the moment she got the letter that anonymity wouldn't be on the table and told her bluntly how such an accusation would play out with the old boys.
We have the manipulations of Reid and McConnell preceding the Kavanaugh nomination to thank for the current partisan warfare over Supreme Court seats. The partisan fighting sullies the reputation, trust in and dignity of the Supreme Court. It looks like neither party cares and Putin's assault on democratic norms in America is winning.
9
@Elizabeth
Very, very wise words. Thank you.
1
Dr. Ford has been criticized for reporting an assault that happened in high school . So what? Men have reported sexual assaults by priests that occurred decades ago. Their allegations have been taken seriously and the RCC has acknowledged the truth of the allegations. Why is the credibility of this decent educated woman accorded less respect than those of men. Ah well, she's a woman who is just "mixed up" according to senator Orrin Hatch. That's probably it.
20
@JWT. Dont' mix up ! Against priest there were vry detailed testimony
2
The country should thank the Senator for her long and distinguished service, for being on the right side far more often than not, and for having the patience and forebearance to be able to work effectively with so many Republicans, especially the many of them certified lunatics. It's also time for her to say goodbye, write the book, give the interviews, name names, and settle some scores. The seat will remain in good hands. The bench is pretty deep and we have to trust the next cohort of party leaders.
The coming battle is a fight to the death for our country. We are looking down the barrel of President Pence, Secretary of State Cotton, Defense Secretary Paul, Intelligence Director Bolton, Interior Secretary Palin, Attorney General Giuliani, Speaker Jordan, Treasury Secretary Kobach, ... Add 4 more hard right Justices. More voter suppression, more gerrymandering. Social Security--you should have saved more. Medicare--ask your doctor. Ready for some authoritarianism?
5
I only hope Feinstein knew perfectly well she'd be criticized by both sides for releasing the accusation this late in the process, but did it anyway to make the most impact against Kavanaugh and Republicans in general before the mid-terms.
If she was truly "taken aback by the intensity and repetition of the criticism" then she has not been paying attention to GOP tactics for the past 30 years.
6
I am from San Francisco. She was president of the board of supervisors in San Francisco when Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk were shot and killed by supervisor Dan White.
She handled the announcement, and the aftermath of that tragedy with grace and dignity.
That same good grace and dignity have exemplified her career. Unfortunately for Senator Feinstein (and for the rest of us), her far left constituents are increasingly demanding that Senator Feinstein behave in a strident manner. She is and always will be an old school centrist Democrat.
I believe she handled her receipt of Dr. Fords's letter in the only manner that Senator Feinstein ethically could, since Dr. Ford requested anonymity. Senator Feinstein had no way of knowing that Dr. Ford was playing games by concurrently leaking the existence of the letter to the Washington Post as they have reported.
Dr. Ford was quite obviously hoping her letter would leak and go viral so that Jude Kavanaugh's nomination would be scuttled without Ford having to testify.
But with an alleged victim insisting on remaining anonymous, with the vintage of the alleged misconduct (36 years ago) and no other accusers, Senator Feinstein rightfully concluded that she could not ethically act on the letter.
I believe Senator Feinstein did the right thing.
8
@Stephen Gianelli She should have let the FBI investigate in July.
This would have been done and protected her anonymity.
If evidence were found, then the person that leaked the letter would have done it , if no evidence, then it probably would have been discarded.
4
Bork,Thomas and Kavanaugh all have/had 'originalist' constitutional views, interpreting its words as they were defined when written. Democrats and leftist prefer to reinterpret meanings of those words.
That is the core reason Democrats launched an all out attack on their character and reputation.
Demonization, the very thing Democrats howl against.
The proof is Kieth Ellison...he gets a pass. Just imagine how Democrats would howl if Kavanaugh had done the same.
9
I can not tell you how much I wish Dr. Blasey had kept this between herself and her counselor. I do not understand why she sent the letter and then insisted on remaining anonymous. What did she want to happen or think should happen. She and Senator Feinstein are putting us through an agony we do not need right now. I worry about when there will be a significant backlash against the #MeToo movement. Like the Nov. elections? When will it be seen as running amuck. Also to me there is a great deal of difference between what happened to Dr. Blasey and to Professor Hill. Do I want another Clarence the horrible Thomas on the Supreme Court? Of course not. Actually I want Judge Garland on the Supreme Court but that was not meant to be. Thank you supreme Republican Mitch McConnell. I am a liberal woman but I want it all to just go away.
13
To those of us who are progressives looking for FDR democrats because that's what our country desperately needs, Feinstein has long been a bitter disappointment.
She has never been progressive, early on opposing gay rights, marijuana legalization, dismantling the military-industrial-congressional complex, and protecting the environment.
She backs our illegal overt and covert wars overseas, wants Snowden tried as a traitor, has backed both Zionism and Saudi Arabia, and is the only Democrat to have voted with Republicans, and against stopping the federal war against state-legalized cannabis.
She never had the insurgent, radical honesty FDR courage that we see from Bernie Sanders, Senator Merkley and a few others.
Her mishandling of the Kavanaugh letter is typical of her failed approach.
She's better than GOP politicians, but not by much.
California deserves a truly progressive senator.
11
This article shows how the country has evolved from the Anita Hill days—except for white Republicans, who are over 60 years old. Unfortunately, many of them are lawmakers in Washington. Same attitudes, same dialogue, same strategy of attack on the opposition. It makes me think it says more about who they are, how out of touch they remain, and why they need to be defeated in their next election.
9
I have often been frustrated by Sen Feinstein’s cautious stance on issues, by in this case she is my hero. Kavanaugh’s nomination is a threat to our most basic American values. She’s done more than any of the other Senate Democrats to help stop his nomination or, at the very least, create enough doubt for a Democratic controlled house to open up a real investigation in January. November 6, 2018! Vote!
10
What was Feinstein's plan when she first encountered the accusation?
1. Never reveal it. Hardly believable.
2. Reveal it in time for a full pre-hearing investigation. After all, if she intended to reveal it at some point, best it be fleshed out with more than a 35-old memory. Didn't happen.
3. Hold it until the last minute, and hope its disclosure too late for investigation without delaying the confirmation indefinitely would result in the hearing being delayed until . . . after the November elections, perhaps?
Whatever qualities Senator Feinstein has, they do not include ethical behavior.
22
@Texas Liberal
All you can suggest with your information is that this is your projection based on your chosen beliefs.
That is why there needed to be an independent investigation by the FBI.
Something else has become patently clear to me:
Democrats are the party of empathy and Love.
Republicans are the party of Fear, conflict and chaos.
Isn’t it patently clear to you to too?
6
There is no correct playbook for exposing sexual assault. Whoever shines a light will be under siege because US leadership does not want to know about it.
6
That the senator "appears bewildered by the swirl of attention" only underscores how very out of touch she is with the present climate. At 85, why would she run for yet another six-year term? William Bradford and the founders of Plymouth were surprised when they began to die. They thoroughly believed they were immortal. Such seems to be the case with the relics we have, still frozen in their scoliotic postures in those Senate chairs—McConnell, Cochran, Hatch, Grassley, Leahy et al—all these remnants who came of age half a century ago. They're worse than The House of Lords. I so look forward to a long overdue changing of the guard. If Bernie can stay current and relevant, why cannot these cloistered aristocrats get out more?
The Torture Report will always remain the great feather in Diane's cap. And she should indeed be thanked for it. At this point, though, like the others, she is an artifact of a different age. I myself am sixty-six, so I do not say this as an arrogant youth, but as someone who begins to gain an understanding of age and its glories and frailties. I often have called her office and asked that she please, as a parting gesture, get rid of oil subsidies so that a teacher like myself can stop earning monies that support the most profitable corporations in the history of the world.
Thank you, Diane, for making the letter public. And understand that those endowed with true grace and generosity know when it is time to leave.
4
It is Senator McConnell, not Senator Feinstein, who is to blame. If he had not blocked Merrick Garland's nomination to SCOTUS, we would likely not be in this mess right now. Sharing blame is Mr. Trump. Selecting a prospective justice who is clearly flawed was a blunder, clearly aimed at placating the evangelical right wing of the GOP. No matter the outcome, Trump and the GOP lose. As for Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Blasey , their lives are forever altered.
11
I was also a young woman appalled by the treatment of Anita Hill. No longer young, I grieve that my country is not better than this today. I stand with Senator Feinstein, looking out for her constituent, and I appreciate her strength. Whatever comes out of the testimony next week, which I fear will result in a new candidate for the Supreme Court who is ideologically even worse, we the voters need to replace these old white male Republicans (and some Democrats) who put party and personal profit over justice, over people, and over the environment. They have forgotten (or never accepted) that they are public servants.
10
@Pshaffer Were you appalled by the treatment reserved by Democrats to the women who accused Bill Clinton?
4
If all of these people signing affidavits, now remember hearing about the assault, then surely at least one person remembers when it happened, and at whose house it took place!
6
Leave Feinstein alone! Dr. Blasey Ford requested anonymity, and Senator Feinstein respected that, while checking back to see it she would be willing to come forward. She acted ethically and responsibly, something the Senate Republicans evidently know nothing about. They're like, "Let's see, how can we blame our confirmation mess on a woman, any woman will do. This whole debacle has nothing to do with our rushing a candidate through despite his obvious shortcomings." The vast majority of Americans are not upset with Diane Feinstein right now. To suggest otherwise is just spin.
8
I believe Judge Kavanaugh committed this act, but I don’t believe it should bar him from the Supreme Court. From what I understand he has a history of elevating women in his profession and by all accounts is not the same person that he was 35 years ago as a teenager. I am a progressive and I believe in rehabilitation.
That said, there are perfectly good reasons that Kavanaugh should be barred from the Supreme Court, and blocking him would be a fine way to stick the needle in Republicans’ eye after blocking Judge Garland. Holding up this crime from 35 years ago as the reason Kavanaugh shouldn’t be approved is an argument in bad faith, which I think is wrong. But Republicans have no qualms with arguing in bad faith, and do so regularly. Is it right to fight fire with fire when trying to protect your country? At what point does it become ignoble to take the high road?
6
Feinstein handled this very poorly, though I do not believe the last-minute release was premeditated. Her age is likely the reason. At 85, she should not be seeking re-election.
6
Dianne Feinstein is taking punches for doing the right thing.
We need more Senators like her!
7
Feinstein totally corrupted the confirmation process by concealing the allegations. If they would have seen the light of day two months ago it would have all been resolved, the "investigation" of a 35 year old teenage beer party would have been concluded (inconclusively) and Kavanaugh would be confirmed by now. He is still going to be confirmed but everyone in the process will have a diminished stature. Most of all Feinstein. Time to retire Senator.
10
An accusation this explosive cannot be kept quiet, and neither Sen. Feinstein nor anyone else should have promised Dr. Blasey confidentiality. It was a major, unforced, error by the Senator.
Feinstein's had a remarkable career, but she's beginning to slip and should retire. Since she won't, California's voters should make the decision for her.
40
This is a political hack job that was purposely delayed for partisan uses and Senator Feinstein’s waste of taxpayer dollars by pigeon holing her “explosive, secret testimony” is Chuck Schumer like and should not be tolerated.
5
@James Conner As a California voter, I much prefer Dianne Feinstein to the other candidate on the ballot, also a Democrat, Kevin Leon. I agree with a lot of the criticism of Dianne Feinstein, and think she should have retired rather than run again. But when voting you have to choose between two names. Feinstein gets my vote.
2
Senator Feinstein is a thoughtful, careful, compassionate and knowledgeable representative. She behaved appropriately and made the correct decisions in this matter. Not remembering whether or not she had contact with Dr. Blasey on a specific date is not a signal of dotage, but rather an indicator that the Senator had several concerns on her mind.
This family is grateful for Senator Feinstein's service to the state of California and we support her.
6
Dianne Feinstein is an American treasure and icon.
When one compares her actions to dropping the required number of senate votes from 60 to 50 for voting on a supreme court nominee or refusing to provide a hearing for President Obama's nominee for the supreme court by Senator 'Mitch" McConnell,
Senator Feinstein comes out looking like the grown up in the senate.
71
@Steven of the Rockies
You do remember it was during the Obama term that it was the Democrats who did away with the 60 number for every position except Supreme Court? After that whatever party needed to get someone through the confirmation process was also going to use that option.
5
@Steven of the Rockiesyou know it was the Democrats who inacting the nuclear option in the Senate right? 2013 ring a bell?
2
@Justin H. –
Democrats used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule for federal judicial appointments –except for appointments to the Supreme Court.
It was McConnell and the Repubs who changed that in 2017.
This makes one wonder why, once the matter was referred to "federal investigative authorities", no investigation was launched, and we are still waiting for one.
88
@Thom Moore
Exactly, Feinstein rightfully refers the assault allegation to the FBI for investigation, but the President, Don McGhan and Senator Grassley break the rules and refuse to allow the FBI to investigate this crime.
13
@Thom Moore. It wasn’t a a federal crime. The FBI does background checks, they do not do investigations for the Senate. Anita Hill made allegations against a Federal employee, which is why that was investigated.
9
@Thom Moore An investigation was called for -- back when Feinstein first received the allegation. But she held it back until no investigation could be completed without delaying the proceedings until . . . after the November elections?
Some smells, and it ain't week-old fish.
5
I wish she would just retire.
41
@dave BLANE
Feinstein knows where all the bodies are buried. She has more clout in her little finger than any new Senator could achieve in 20 years.
She would probably love to retire but needs to stay on until the Senate Dems regains power.
6
@dave BLANE She's only 85. Pelosi's only 78. Bernie Sanders is only 77. There are a lot of fresh new ideas coming from these people. Let's keep them on as they're doing a fantastic job.
This whole issue reeks of another false accuser type problem used for purely political gain.
34
She still gets therapy for the experience and passed a lie detector test. The stench you’re picking up doesn’t come from her.
4
@X
What proof do you have of that.
She should testify and her therapist should not be believed before she testifies as well.
According to what I have read Ms. Ford did not say who tried to rape her when she first told this story to her therapist but we have to believe that based on what she supposedly told her therapist a lie detector test was given to her.
I don't believe it.
That's not how therapy is done.
Any and all criticism levied from any republican rings totally hollow here.
That being said, we need new blood and new leadership in the Democratic party.
Kamla Harris is a great example of what we need. She’s going to fight, and fight hard.
34
@T
After her embarrassing mind reading act during the hearings she is not what we need. I also always find her word usage lacks the precision you'd expect from a former AG.
5
Dianne Feinstein has been through much, much worse - she's one of the toughest, most resilient people out there and a wily politician to boot. I'm proud and lucky to be one of her constituents.
56
@John Cook
I'm a Democrat and I'm not.
2
Sen. Feinstein did as the VICTIM asked! If she had turned it over the only difference in this story would be that "she did not do what the victim asked, she did what she wanted..." would be the main line.
81
“Senator Feinstein faced a choice that none of us would want to, and I think she handled it responsibly,” said Senator Richard J. Durbin, an Illinois Democrat who sits on the panel. “What was Senator Feinstein to do at this point, ignore her request, make it public to the embarrassment of her and her family?”
Exactly. Feinstein would have been criticized no matter how she handled this matter. What else should she have done? This is a non-story.
111
Gang GOP will get payback in November. If Kavanaugh becomes a Justice, he may still be impeached. This is not going away. A would be felon on the Supreme Court, Putin has his revenge. Gang GOP, I hope you are proud of yourselves. Vote everyone, yes, vote everyone.
32
All those years of being non-partisan have been undone by rewriting her history as a vile partisan who likely hurt the entire #metoo movement (where are the other metoo-ers with regards to Kavanaugh). Of all the people that have shown to be repugnant, Feinstein is at the very top. If Blasey wanted no part of coming forward, and the facts were foggy to begin with, and no other evidence of a sexual predator existed, well then Feinstein needed to put that letter in her desk drawer and move on. She made a terrible decision, and she should resign.
33
@manko
Totally disagree. If anything Feinstein should have acted sooner.
3
@manko, Feinstein has never been non-partisan.
2
@manko
The BIG questions are, that Feinstein should have considered way before this came out, “was Prof Ford drinking at this party?” “Why was she there at the party?” “Why was she wearing a bathing suit.” “Why did this all come out in 2012 in “couples therapy” with her husband, who also should have known the story!! “Why didn’t her parents report the so called assault? 36 years ago, when she was a teenager, women were in the throws of the feminist movement...asserting themselves...it was societal. Plus, no professional, educated therapist can release notes from her sessions with Prof Ford. It’s a law to protect the patient!! If they are used to defend Fotd, the therapist should lose her license...thecwhole charade is a disgusting ploy by the Democrats, once again, because they have no real direction or leader. What an embarrassment for the country....
8
Joe Biden erred in 1991; Dianne Feinstein was overcautious this time. But their mistakes were minor. The real fault lies with the Republican Senators who lied and are lying.
119
Both Senator Feinstein and Dr. Blasey want it both ways - to keep her anonymity, but to pursue public allegations against Judge Kavanagh.
But that's not the way justice works in this country - here, the defendant has the right to confront his accuser.
And even more so in this scenario, where an anonymous accusation, which, happening over 30 years ago, is going to be impossible to prove.
While I appreciate Dr Blasey's desire to maintain her privacy, she is not entitled to that if she wants to derail someone's career.
58
@G .
With the already outrageously biased public statements from the President, Grassley, Grassley's "investigator" and multitude of other GOP committee members who have revealed they are dead set to vote AGAINST Dr. Ford, this hearing is set up to be nothing short of another GOP assault on Dr. Ford.
3
@G except this isn't a trial, it's a job interview for a lifetime appointment!
@G You've confused a Supreme Court nomination with a criminal prosecution. You've confused a Senate committee with a court of law.
2
We need to stop pretending that recent SCOTUS appointments are anything but political appointees.
SCOTUS judges should either have term limits. Or, since the republicans have now turned SCOTUS into a political organization, all SCOTUS candidates should have to campaign like any other political candidate. So, citizens should be able to vote and elect them when we elect Presidents.
Senator Feinstein was just trying to protect the privacy of a citizen who is trying to do her civic duty as we were all taught in school. The Republican response proves my point that SCOTUS appointments are political and hardly independent minded Justices.
70
@Truth Is True, I think you need to look at the appointees from the democrat side, especially from Obama before you throw stones. BTW, Feinstein had plenty of ways to address this issue other than to wait till the last minute and attempt to derail the judges confirmation, but her objective was to derail and delay.
4
@Truth Is True.....yes.... " why we don't subject our high court justices to limited terms or mandatory retirement ages -- like nearly every other country in the world."
Per Washington Post, 2016 "Why it's time to get serious about Supreme Court term limits."
Vox 2016: "No other democracy gives life tenure to judges on its version of the Supreme Court".
Feinstein's ability to make peace with Republicans will come in handy when this episode causes her to lose a seat in a Senate which she lost touch with decades ago. Now she can start some lofty bipartisan group to advocate for her politics - more military, less health care, etc.
20
@Michael
The vast majority of Democrats in California don't agree with your opinion of Senator Feinstein and the antics of her desperate opponent will cost him.
@Michael
Being from California I can tell you that she's not going to lose her seat. This is especially true because she's running against Kevin de Leon who essentially appears to work for the citizens of Mexico and not the US.
1