He is an only child of parents who were well-to-do. That says so much.
6
Kavanaugh's nomination is but a chapter in the larger book, "Republicans Destroying The Republic". It's party, and thus power, over country. Authors such as Ruth Marcus should turn their attention to how to fix the broken republic.
We can start by changing the way we appoint Supreme Court justices. Let's eliminate lifetime tenure, which is too tempting of a political prize. Eighteen year terms, with the possibility of renomination and confirmation, should work, with one every 2 years. And let's amend the rules of the Senate to require a vote on every presidential nominee within 120 days. No more McConnell gambits.
11
We are tired of the tirades. Kavanaugh's shocking behavior during his "confirmation" hearing is not something any of us can soon forget. His wife's expression throughout was most telling - clearly not the first time he has "lost it" - she looked both frightened and resigned. Yep - another white man in power whose bad temper controls everyone around him.
12
What a terrible review.
"Blasey Ford’s testimony was precise and measured — and credible."
- Her testimony was imprecise. She couldn't recall dates or how she got home. Nobody she claims was at the party remembers the party. Her friend she claimed was there said she was not (and that she was pressured to lie to support Ford's testimony).
- Her testimony was measured. Measured by what standard?
-Her testimony was credible. Her testimony was incredible. She could provide no evidence. Statements she made, such as being claustrophobic to the point of being unable to travel on a plane were demonstrably false based on her history of air travel.
Deborah Ramirez ... well even this author had to acknowledge her "significant memory lapses."
"The most interesting part of Marcus’s narrative is her discussion of why, in the end, the evidence mattered so little."
-What evidence is the author talking about? The fact is there was no evidence. There was testimony that was vague and unsubstantiated by the other alleged witnesses and that's all. The contemporaneous evidence - Kavanaugh's detailed calendar - contradicted what little detail Ford provided.
66
Thanks for m excellent review of what sounds like an excellent book. But I’m not sure I’m going to read it because we already know that Kavanaugh’s appointment was a travesty. I agree that he disqualified himself with his unseemly wailing, crying, shouting and outright paranoid accusations — during his confirmation hearing.
I’m a lawyer who has practiced in federal court for 35 years. I’ve seen the profound harm done by partisan judges at the trial and appellate level. These sordid jurists have usurped the will of juries and even of Congress, to impose their personal view (which supposedly plays no part in a judge’s decisions). Whether they do it for lucre or for some other insidious reason is beside the point.
I watched the “witch trial” that was Kavanaugh’s hearing. The senate treated Professor Blasey as the witch; Kavanaugh’s behavior was beyond disgusting. I cannot put myself through that despair again by reading about it in a very insightful book.
The book will be useful for our nation’s history. But I will take a pass on it, thank you.
354
@Scottapottomus - I might read the book though I suspect it will be demoralizing. I agree with your well written comment. I am horrified what is happening to our justice system. I think Brett Kavanaugh is the wrong person to be setting on the highest court in the land.
41
I used to revere the Supreme Court but then Justice Thomas was appointed. Then Gorsuch in a seat that rightfully belonged to Merrick Garland. Now we have an angry, entitled Kavanaugh who is undoubtedly guilty as charged. Needless to say, my admiration of the court is gone.
617
@Pigenfrafyn
"Undoubtedly guilty as charged?" Love or hate Kavanaugh--I would say I strongly dislike him--saying that he is undoubtedly guilty as charged shows your unfamiliarity with the criminal justice system.
There is not even enough evidence against Kavanaugh to mount a convincing civil case. You would sentence him to jail for several years for attempted rape over an uncorroborated accusation from 3 decades ago? You realize "beyond a reasonable doubt" is a deliberately steep standard, right?
So glad we live in a system of laws where political whims like yours don't lead to prison sentences.
25
@Mark I’m not saying anything of the sort. But if there is even the slightest possibility that Kavanaugh has abused several women, he certainly doesn’t deserve a lifetime appointment to our highest court.
60
@Mark
How could he be proved innocent or guilty? There was never any investigation.
To me, the essential question is whether someone who acted the way Kavanaugh did in his famous rant against the left is capable of making decisions in a non-partial way in accordance with the law and not in accordance with his own political bias.
65
But sources close to former Justice Kennedy assert that it is false and absurd that he would lobby for any judicial candidate to replace him. Moreover, it is intriguing, given Kennedy's role as the swing vote in so many crucial Supreme Court decisions that have advanced the progressive agenda, that Marcus would seek to throw him under the bus and besmirch his legacy. Indeed, one would think that the fact Kavanaugh clerked for Kennedy and may have had his support would have been viewed as indicators of his judicial moderation. But the malicious partisan hysteria that enveloped this nomination over Kavenaugh's decades old alleged juvenile misdeeds obscured and trivialized this important inquiry.
1
@Sue Sponte
Attempted rape is hardly a juvenile misdeed.
11
We really need to start substituting the word "plausible" for the word "credible." The Rolling Stone 'A Rape on Campus' story of gang rape on a bed of broken glass was obviously implausible. Blasey-Ford's story is plausible. However, 'credible' is a whole nother level. 'Credible' means--or should mean--more than "not obviously implausible and she seemed to me to be telling the truth." Credible should involve looking for inconsistencies, corroboration or lack thereof, motive to lie, and other factors. Blasey-Ford's story changed over time, contained inconsistencies like her claimed fear of flying (which her friends were unaware of and which did not prevent her from many international surfing trips), and was not corroborated by witnesses she said were there. Her story may have been plausible, and she may have seemed truthful when she told it, but all things considered it was not credible.
https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/02/21-reasons-not-to-believe-christine-blasey-fords-claims-about-justice-kavanaugh/#.XeUlxuE0VR4.twitter
21
@Tom We have one person's personal recollection of a traumatic life event complete with corroborating evidence on one side and the counter-argument is to deny that one can have a fear of something and still do it, and have that then be used to discount whatever the person says ???
Any debate where this " but she flew despite saying ..." as the winning response is evidence of a rigged system.
5
@Tom even if true, this is something that occurred when he was 17 years old. Give us a break! Lindsay Graham's comments at the hearing were entirely appropriate.
3
@Tom
If I may speak from the gut. Brett Kavanaugh gives me the willies, none of the other Justices give me the willies as distasteful as their judicial ideology may be. This of course would disqualify me from the bench. As for Christine Blasey Ford I would love to see her on the Supreme Court but that is because a legal system that rewards winners and punishes losers is a legal system not a justice system.
Lawyers seek victory justices should seek justice. I am sure the founders envisioned philosophers not shysters on the bench.
6
Media engages in a mantra which states that Blasey Ford's testimony was "highly credible", yet there is no question as to what makes one "highly credible". Is it simply sounding like a sympathetic figure or a mix of verifying facts, past history, etc?
As I suspect psychologists know, a person can sound "highly credible" but be factually wrong. When treating a patient, one is not looking to fully verify what actually occurred, but rather that the patient believes it's true. You are treating the patient, not running an investigation.
This embrace of pop psychology to make judgements which impact the lives of so many (in lieu of facts) is a danger akin to the worst moments of American history: Salem Witch Trials, view of slaves and african americans, view of immigrants, McCarthyism, etc, etc. It is essentially the foundation on which bigotry is built.
37
@They
So I gather that Kavanaugh's "tune-up" at the White House and his subsequent bizarre behavior afterwards should be discounted altogether.
Talk about patients how would you rate Kavanaugh's behavior post (probably) Trump/Miller intervention?
The man was separating at the seams but still equivocated and dissembled.
So much for pop psychology vs. reality TV.
The reality was the Brett Kavanaugh we saw before the hearing was brought to a humane conclusion.
Brett Kavanaugh should never have been nominated.
And. in the name of common decency, Brett Kavanaugh should never have been confirmed.
28
@They ...Everything you say is fine, but what about Kavanaugh's credibility? We certainly must discern the candidate's truthfulness and character. Verifying claims and evaluating testimony with a minimum of prejudice was not even the senate's goal, sadly.
8
@They I agree. Furthermore, judging an account as credible should involve looking not just at the manner of the person testifying, but the consistency of the story, corroboration or lack thereof, and other factors. Blasey-Ford's story changed, there were inconsistencies in her accounts (like her claimed fear of flying that did not stop her from many international surfing trips), and her story wasn't corroborated by witnesses she herself named.
People be going around pronouncing "I find her story credible" like they are experienced judges weighing all the circumstances, when what they mean is "Her story is at least possible and I want to believe her."
5
The Supreme Court of the United States is the workplace of two known sex offenders: Kavanaugh and Thomas. The Senate of the United States is one of the most immoral institutions anywhere in history. It put it's imprimatur on these men: it voted for them to decide "what the law is". Many men are in the prisons of this nation who have no faith in the decisions of this Court. Men who are suspect morally, and legally, have put those men in prisons by way of their interpretations of "the law". Justice does not appear to flow from those hallowed halls any more. It appears to be a debate society with biased and obviously flawed debaters. The respect the institution once commanded has turned to contempt. We are in a deeper problem than the late 30;s and 40's when the philosophy of the dissenters of opinions were seen to be correct. Today, the dissenters are seen as co-conspirators staying and working under corrupt conditions. We may well need to heed Jefferson and elect the judges.
57
@Roger Duronio Sadly, electing the judges is not the answer. We "elect" the 535 who clearly represent their own interests and the interests of their financial backers above all else. We really need a better system; in order to have that we need to be better people.
18
Republicans (whether they admit it or not, whether they know it or not) are banking on some very vile, very dangerous, form of minority authoritarian rule enforced by threats of populist violence.
They attack the idea of the rule of law and the legitimacy of democratic politics while deliberately provoking outrage and despair among their opponents. They mock the idea of rational discourse based on objective facts and consistent principles.
This is pure idiocy. Self destructive idiocy.
5
Here it is two days since this article hit the e-pages and there's still just 168 Comments. Yeah, i know, what should I expect?---it's a 'book review'.
Well, it's also a book by a women, and in many instances, about the treatment of women by men in our culture. So much of what women bring to the table, particularly their unoia, even women themselves, falls to the wayside in our culture like trees on a tract of land getting clearcut.
And there's just too much evidence misogyny is why. It is alive and well in our culture and why women must 'lean in' at their own risk no matter how many breakthroughs by and concerning women may occassionally have eclipsed prevailing notions of misogyny.
How are men not to look at the likes of men like Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaigh as models tro emulate for beating the system, both of whom have a chronicled yet not damning history of treating women like sexual doormats to wipe their body parts on or view a woman's body as little more than plunder for their sexual pleasure?
4
Just impeach him. He's worse than Thomas, but not by much. Thomas has a bit more class.
2
Can't wait for the movie.
1
The NYT refers to members of the Federalist Society as conservatives. They are not. They are radical right wing extremists who serve entitled white male power and control over country and Constitution. They are a stain on the Constitution.
They infest and undermine the rule of law and justice.
8
You can write all the reviews in the world stating that the allegations were 'credible', but none of them make it true. Some day the left will realize just how disgusting and how wrong it was to falsely accuse a sitting Federal Judge of Sexual Assault, just to stop them from being put on the Supreme Court out of fear they would ultimately reverse Roe Vs Wade. No one would want that to happen to their Son, their Husband or their Father but it was ok to do in this case because the stakes were so high, or that is what it seems to those of us outside of the bubble you lefties seem to live in. We who witnessed it will not forget, nor do I at least intend to forgive. Nothing else I have seen in my entire lifetime frightened me as much as seeing what was done to this Good Man, for purely political reasons.
3
@GregP
Gee, nothing else in my entire lifetime frightened ME as much as the spectacle Kavanaugh made of himself during the hearings. This man has the power of life and death over this country, and THAT'S how he behaves? Lack of control, or what!
#BlueTsunami2020
9
The right detests government but they love the SC. It is time for an expansion of the court and for Congress to start legislating to undo the erring ways of the court. Presidential candidates are mia on the SC.
3
The issues with Kavanaugh’s nomination and appointment should go beyond the accusations to the fact the man has barely, if any, real legal experience and continues to live a completely sheltered life in not DC the city, but the bubble that is the NW DC hardcore Catholic community of select private schools, country clubs and churches. While I’ve no doubt he’s smart, and clearly has the preferred Yale pedigree, professionally he’s done nothing more than maneuver his way into a series of prized political appointments, made possible by his rich parents who must have subsidized these low paying jobs while he lived in a very expensive city, sent his kids to private schools etc etc. He parlayed the connections into a short but lucrative stint at a big law firm where he did who knows what as it is clear at that point he had never tried a case, probably never actually stepped foot in a court room other than as a bag carrier and has likely never met with an individual that needed legal services. Next thing you know, he’s back on the DC Court of Appeals then the Supreme Court, mostly because of a series of carefully crafted opinions that played to the conservative base and enough money and connections to keep it up long enough for both the Senate and the Presidency to be controlled by conservatives. The fact that Bush was hesitant to nominate him speaks volumes about how deeply troubled our supposed meritocracy has become.
8
Trump and Kavanaugh are both good examples of a need to overhaul the rules for who sits in the federal bench and how they get there. First on the docket should be a discussion about lifetime appointments.
6
To all appearances, Kavanaugh is a familiar figure: the young man on the make, defined more by his ambition than by his talents or his character.
From the very beginning he knows what's important --whose ring to kiss, whose back to slap.
He knows what to say (and what not to say) in order to ingratiate himself with the powerful men --it's almost always men --who can facilitate his rise.
Like a literary character in a trashy novel, he has a weakness: he drinks too much. Drink brings down his guard. A young man with his eye on the Supreme Court wouldn't normally misbehave around women. He would keep his base passions in check. But the booze unleashes his inner frat boy.
Cornered, he lashes out at his accusers. How dare they step in to thwart his ambitions when he is so close to claiming his prize?
But not to worry. The men whose rings he kissed and whose backs he slapped will protect him. They recognize him as one of theirs.
There is no honor in the Republican party, but there is loyalty of a sort. Ambitious men stick together (until their rival ambitions cause them to part).
11
It's important to recall that the in the afternoon the hearing degenerated into puerile ranting, led by Senator Graham soon followed by the rest of the Republicans. The orriginal procedure, which was initiated by the Republicans and accepted by both sides, was that a neutral expert on sex crimes would lead the questioning of both witnesses. This format was followed in the morning session when Dr. Ford testified. After the break, the expert asked Kavanaugh two rounds of questions at that point Graham interrupted the proceedings with a lengthy attack on the Democrats for persecuting Kavanaugh. Chairman Grassley did nothing to gavel Graham to order, and the expert never asked another question. There can be little doubt that this destruction of the process was planned to derail the proceedings and turn opinion away from Ford by making Kavanaugh a victim. There were in effect two hearings: one for the female that followed the rules established by the Republicans and another for the male using ad hoc rules. Think of this fiasco as just another example of the corruption of power by those who cannot even honor the very rules they established.
9
It makes a person wonder how many deals were made between Kavanaugh and Trump before Trump even nominated Kavanaugh. Buddy system.
Nevertheless, how many of us will think of Kavanaugh: a blubbering, crying baby giving his testimony before joining the Court.
We pray for RBG everyday in every way.
5
I have a diminishing hope that somehow, in some way, the lock that the Republican Senate has on our democracy, will be broken in 2020. One of the most pathetic and troubling events in our recent history is the refusal of our elected representatives to adhere to the rule of law and the expression of the truth. The Supreme Court, for many of us, became a kangaroo court, with the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh. My husband and I have a 33 year old son. Ten of his friends have decided that they can no longer live in the US, and have emigrated to other countries. Some had dual citizenship, some asked to be moved to overseas offices, three were able to secure jobs. They are disgusted with what the US has become and appalled at the belly crawling, fawning members of the House and Senate who have become the standard bearers for "what America stands for." The Supreme Court will, of course, rule in favor of this so-called conservative wing, which is nothing more than a cabal of nut jobs.
8
Excellent candidate for impeachment from the Supreme Court. If he lied to Congress (and we know he did), removal is imperative.
17
Dr. Ford was totally credible, but her accusations were inappropriate in a confirmation hearing.
Kavanaugh's denials were totally non-credible, and they had no place in a confirmation hearing.
Unlike Clarence Thomas, Kavanaugh was a highly competent judge, fully qualified for the Supreme Court. The attempt to destroy his nomination by injecting Twitter-fuelled character assassination into the nomination process was every bit as disgusting as Trump's soliciting election interference from Ukraine.
The only political moral to be taken from this story is that the debasement of US politics arises equally from the bottom and the top.
6
@Sequel: Without directly saying it, you confirm what others have missed about Kavanaugh's confirmation: Republicans did not believe that his conduct toward Ford was disqualifying while Democrats did. Maybe it wasn't partisanship that got Kavanaugh confirmed. Maybe it was a difference in values. He's probably not the first violent boozer to sit on the Court.
3
@ Sequel... to make sure I understand your statement - your opinion is that a credible allegation of attempted rape had no place in consideration of a man who will make crucial, nationally implemented decisions on women’s issues. Did I get that right?
3
Once again women lose in the age of Trump, and if Roe is overturned will continue to lose. The wall of angry old white men is holding steady and unwavering against any signs of progress and reality beyond a 1950’s America where they ruled as kings. Let’s please elect them out so the rest of society besides this out of touch sliver of society can also take part in the American dream. This is more than just partisanship, it is delusional.
19
As if trump has read the book...
20
@Solamente Una Voz
As if Trump COULD read the book. Too many big words.
2
We Americans are witnessing the gradual but steady deterioration of respect for American institutions.
Simultaneous to this is the steady deterioration of respect from other countries for America as a result of having an unfit president.
As the white majority becomes more threatened by becoming the white minority in America, that large angry group of undereducated voters led by a white nationalist president will act out more violently.
What we are witnessing is the quiet behind the scenes manipulations of the president and his white nationalist advisor.
All of this is made possible by the influential electronic media led by Fox News and the internet social media.
34
Just what we’ve always needed — a self-pitying, hard drinking, abusive, flagrantly partisan right-wing lawyer sitting on the Supreme Court; one who seems to be in the pocket of the most corrupt demagogue ever to occupy the Oval Office. That surely lends credibility and an appearance of utmost fairness to the Court’s rulings on sensitive issues that affect the daily lives of tens of millions of Americans.
Some nabob observed here that we should ‘just get over it’ and move on. I agree. I firmly believe we are approaching the time when the progressive states that account for over two-thirds of this nation’s economic output, and whose federal tax payments subsidize the loudmouthed minority of the population living in the backward ‘red states,’ should seriously contemplate their exit from the very disunited “United States.” We should not have to take direction from men like Brett Kavanaugh; or from the redneck voters of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and other benighted regions.
It’s time to move on, all right.
26
And, so it goes for the GOP. Their lack of a public conscience. All their energy is in Party first. Mitch McConnell is at the center of the cognitive depletion of the Nation being first rung everything else below it. The GOP playbook is a corruption of our current administration.
23
I almost could not read this article- I am still so angry at the recollection of entitled Kavanaugh speech and the aftermath of him being seated at the Supreme Court Bench....
...and no recourse in sight...
41
I was with the cops when they went to Kavanaugh’s house to investigate complaints that his wife had gone missing. In the living room, sitting on a padlocked steamer trunk, we found Kavanaugh and Grassley.
The cops asked Kavanaugh to open the trunk, but he wouldn’t do it, saying that just getting into the house was enough investigation and that opening the trunk would be harassment. He angrily told the cops that he was a judge and “what comes around, goes around.”
Good enough for me. Good enough for you?
13
@Charlierf This is about the scariest thing I've read in a long while. Gave me chills. Thank you for telling your story.
6
@Charlierf
WHAT? Did I fall off the planet? When did this happen?
2
Kavanaugh could have gone up before the Judiciary Committee when the accusations against him first surfaced and leveled with the American people by saying something honest like:
“I drank way too much in high school.
I got drunk a lot.
I treated a lot of girls badly.
Yes, I roughed up Dr. Ford.
And later when I had daughters of my own I was sorry for how
I acted.
But it was too late then for me to do anything about it.
The truth is I am now a very different man who believes he could be a very good Supreme Court Justice."
The American people are usually pretty good about recognizing honesty in politicians and a truthful statement from him about how he behaved many years ago might have saved his reputation.
But it wasn’t in him, and he has still not apologized to Dr. Ford.
Like Justice Thomas before him who has never apologized to Anita Hill, he has besmirched the reputation of the Court by serving on it.
40
@A. Stanton -- Absolutely correct. Two sexual predators (at least) on the Supreme Court. Each should be impeached.
14
Believe in something ...even if you can't remember anything.
That sums the testimony of 'Dr' Ford.
4
@Ami This is snark, as far as I'm concerned, and the NYT should not have published it.
16
At some point we all need to reconcile with the fact that the rulers of empires and our nations and personal lives, whether they be princes, presidents, popes, priests or judges are all the most debauched, amoral, exploitative and cruel amongst us.
How else does one get to the top?
Only by stepping on a lot of decent people on the way up it seems.
Morality and decency is only expected of us little common folks... and god forbid we transgress, the full weight of the law descends upon our heads.
20
In the end, all I could think was that if a woman had been the nominee and had she showed the slightest hint of anger at any point during the nomination process, she would have been out the door faster than you could turn your head.
With the addition of Kegger Kavanaugh to a court including Coke Can Thomas, the “Supreme” Court has lost all moral relevance for women. That they are now in a position to rule over the most intimate parts of our bodies and lives warrants only disgust.
50
I have a funny feeling that Thomas speaks little and writes not at all because when he was put on the court, the court itself silenced him.
Note how little Kavanaugh speaks.
Just my crystal ball at work.
9
Beer-swilling party boys with an adolescent dearth of empathy may not be our first choice for the Supreme Court. Indeed, if Kavanaugh had continued such a template into an arrested adulthood (like some politicians on both sides of the political divide that we know), I would have opposed his appointment as well.
To all accounts, however, Kavanaugh developed into a reflective and respected jurist, whose personal conduct as a grown-up had left such imbecilities far behind him. Since such a course typifies a good many adults I know and respect, I'm inclined to let those more mature personae guide my judgment about how they are going to behave now.
3
@Dpoole It is clear that you did not watch Kav's performance at the hearing, which was anything but reflective, respectable or that of a grown-up.
27
"Given the ethical obligation of judges to act at all times in ways that promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, his outbursts should have been disqualifying."
Such a reveal of bias weakens the overall article.
2
I graduated from Yale in 1978. At the time there were no official fraternities, which was great. But a number of guys established an unofficial fraternity, DKE. Every guy in it was a jerk or much worse. It was comprised of terrible athletes who barely made a team , but never won a letter. They were the ultimate athletic bottom feeders. The composition of DKE never changed. Brett was not even good enough to make a team, let alone earn a letter. He wanted to be an athletic bottom feeder, but was not even good enough for that. For the record, I won 7 letters.
7
Kavanaugh was only 17 years old when he allegedly briefly assaulted but did not rape Ford. If someone that young goes on to lead a blameless life, is he denied redemption? Is he to be denied an opportunity to rise to his potential?
4
@Bill
“A steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action.”
Brock Turner’s dad.
2
@DeAnnG Brock Turner was arrested at the time of his offense. The situation with Kavanaugh is different as he is accused of an alledged offense that might have occurred decades ago for which there is no supporting evidence or witnesses. Again, does a 17 year old boy continue to pay for an alledged offense for the rest of his life? Thank you for helping make my point.
This doesn't boil down to "he said, she said" since there was a third person in the room who got away with staying silent.
13
What is truly amazing is the double standard -- of justice.
These same people who demand video taped evidence (that has not been tampered with) and then say that the criminal act really wasn't a crime assert that all those in prion on much less evidence re guilty beyond any possible doubt.
I can only attribute modern Republicanism to a gross failure of our education system both in teaching civics and logic.
9
It’s all about making a buck. Nothing new nor particularly deep analysis are presented in the book; the hearings presented a man with a questionable past, not fit for the SCOTUS. The hearings revealed all that in living color. For the author, just a chance to make money.
2
I remember Rep. Jerrold Nadler saying after the Kavanaugh debacle that they were going to "impeach" him. What happened to that?
2
Thinking about Brett Kavanaugh being on the Supreme Court is very demoralizing.
Judges that the Trump administration has installed upon us means only the wealthy, the powerful, the conservative can expect fair treatment.
Is there anyway to reverse this heinous nightmare that the conservatives have visited upon us?
84
@DogRancher "Is there any way to reverse . . .?" In theory, yes. First you have to elect a Democratic Senate. You could then try impeaching Kavanaugh, though unless Democrats have 67 Senate seats, that would ultimately fail. The other option is to expand the Court from 9 to 11 members, which is not prohibited by the Constitution or any statute.
19
This book and the parade of comments following illustrate one of the reasons why Republicans win so many elections - and it is not because of “the Russians”, either. They know when to move on. Too many Democrats fail to recognize this vital point. No matter how well it can be argued that Kavanaugh was not an ideal candidate for the Supreme Court is a waste of time now. Recognize that fact. Democrats and Feminists and progressives must devote their efforts in getting the Equal Rights Amendment ratified and in supporting electable Democrat candidates to local, statewide and national office. This is a battle we can (and must) win.
23
@Maureen In what sense is it a waste of time for a professional journalist to research and write a book about a sitting Supreme Court justice (and one who will presumably sit on the Court for decades, at that)? The job of journalists and writers is to dig, research, report, and write, in order to provide the public with the best possible version of the truth—not to get various people elected or amendments passed. I, for one, want to know the truth about Brett Kavanaugh, every bit of it that can be ascertained, irrespective of its real-world consequences.
And furthermore, your comment about the Republicans baffles me: This is the party who still (!) bang on endlessly about Hillary Clinton and her emails, who banged on about Benghazi for what felt like about 100 years, who are still convinced (despite all the evidence to the contrary) that tax cuts can be made to pay for themselves—how can it be said that such a party “knows when to move on”? I just don’t see it.
30
To this day, liberal Democrats almost unanimously believe Kavanaugh guilty. And conservative Republicans almost unanimously believe him innocent. I tend to give high credence to partisans who look at facts and come out on the other side of an issue. There are almost none of those in this case. As far as I'm concerned, there is simply no way to know exactly what happened at that alcohol-fueled party 37 years ago. Democrats should have opposed him on the grounds of ideology and long-term effect on the court. In fact, that was their motivation and what ultimately happened.
8
@LetsBeCivil I respectably think you have it slightly off. Democrats unanimously believe Kavanaugh is guilty; Republicans don't care one way or the other. Guilty or not, he serves their purpose. BTW, new evidence has come out that adds important nuance to claims of sexual misconduct; evidence that the FBI investigation has come out; & most damnably, there are numerous examples of where Kavanaugh lied under oath in this & other instances. He was denounced by the American Bar Association. To say his conduct was unbecoming to the office in a way that should've disqualified him goes unsaid. I actually predict when power shifts, he & Clarence Thomas (who also has new evidence about potential sexual misconduct, as well as increasing evidence that Anita Hill was railroaded in more ways than we even knew) may be among the few Supreme Court Justices to undergo a serious impeachment process. They most certainly will inspire an expansion of the court regardless. Now, mine is not a partisan opinion: I do not belong to either party. For example, Neil Gorsuch has as disturbing & hateful, politically/ideologically infused/compromised opinions as either Thomas or Kavanaugh. He's Scalia-esque wily & smarter than them, too. I would love it if he was removed - but he hasn't committed the potential disqualifying violations Kavanaugh & Thomas have. Gorsuch's a serious jurist appointed (relatively) fairly according to the rules of democracy & hasn't done anything concrete to have himself ejected.
13
Where else can men who have been credibly accused of sexual misconduct against women still receive a pass?
Oh, that’s right, the U.S. Presidency and U.S. Supreme Court! Maybe they should have all tried to deny their behavior in an interview on the BBC
like Prince Andrew has done!
167
@CeceliaR
Credibly accused means the accusation is actually credible. Nothing about Ford's accusations are credible. Nothing. You can start with her scrubbing her social media before making the accusation, or you can just point to the fact she waited until he was nominated to the Supreme Court to make them or you can just put your blinders on and state that she was credible. Up to you but you should expect any male in your life you care about to someday face the same type of accusation.
2
When I saw Kavanaugh's rage, his childlish, "Woe is me" tirade replete with a runny nose, I thought his appointment was doomed. It speaks to how far we've come on the road to perdition that this uninformed, sexist infant now sits on our Supreme Court.
228
This book seems like a rollicking good read that takes off on Mat Damon's hilarious impersonation of the self-pitying out of control Brett Kavanaugh on SNL I just wish the author was quoted more in Adam Cohen's review.
18
The politics of personal destruction goes on and on. The substance hasn't changed. It consists of unverified salacious accusations intended to smear a political opponent with so much slime that it becomes inconceivable that he (and soon she?) could ever sit on the nation's highest court.
Innocence or guilt are beside the point. The point is to turn the Senate hearings into a pigsty so that no victim (Bork, Thomas, Kavanaugh) can escape without some of the stink clinging to him.
Adam Cohen and Ruth Marcus may get brownie points with NYT readers for this travesty of their profession, but the rest of us have a duty to make sure these rancid tactics never get rewarded.
19
@Ian Maitland You can call it whatever you want.
However, there is no question that Kavanaugh violated the judicial code of ethics that he swore to follow as a member of the bench.
That alone should have disqualified him.
46
@Ian Maitland
Maybe the Republican party should consider better candidates. Or do they have no better candidates?
37
@Ian Maitland: If the Senate hearings were turned into a pigsty it was because of the one they had in the Docket. The stink did not cling to those three due to the hearings. It was always there.
9
Kavanaugh proves the old adage. It’s not what you know, it’s who you nose.
71
Interesting that the root of most of our present political disasters
is the Clintons. The damage they did is incalculable and it continues to loom whenever push comes to shove.
My spirit soared when Biill Clinton emerged as a force in the party.
Now I feel that most of our woes can be traced to his misconduct and her ferocious bid for the presidency.
14
@Kathy S
People don't like to talk about this, but you're right. I believe we could not have had a President Trump without our first having had a President Clinton.
2
@Kathy S
I think our current moment in which there is no bottom to the lies and lack of ethics really began when George and Jeb Bush stole the 2000 election with their mendacity in Florida.
An illegitimate president - and his illustrious family - including a former president who was a war hero - was pleased.
We've never recovered.
And since then, all things are possible.
9
@Kathy S So it's all the Clintons' fault, eh? What, you can't spare any blame for Newt Gingrich and Mitch McConnell for the slash-and-burn tactics they introduced, and which Republicans still practice to this day? How is it the Clintons' fault that when a Republican governor is defeated (Wisconsin, North Carolina, Kentucky), if the legislature is majority Republican, it rams through a set of new laws intended to hamstring the Democratic governor before he or she takes office?
Also, Kathy, almost all presidential candidates' campaigns are "ferocious." What was different about Hillary's? And which candidate in 2016 routinely called the other "crooked"? A hint: it wasn't Hillary.
8
Make that 2 SC justices and one US president credibly accuses of sexual misconduct and elected anyway.
And so, still apparently, it goes.
55
@Robert Tobin Don’t you mean 2 Presidents: Clinton and Trump?
2
Like millions of others, I was appalled at the shamefully dirty politics put Kavanaugh on the court. Still, I found it a bit distasteful that this reviewer found it necessary to call Marcus's book "highly insightful and a rollicking good read." Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but that's advertising copy, not supported by anything else in the review.
10
Nothing in Blasey Ford's testimony provided as compelling evidence of Brett Kavanaugh's truly unsavory character as his own treatment of his questioners in its aftermath.
148
@Vincent Amato I agree but after 2.5 decades of reading criminal trial transcripts and writing briefs on behalf of the People, I feel like I have a pretty good gauge of what rings true. And what rang true for me was a tiny detail. When Dr. Ford spoke about being pushed into the bedroom, she remembered the positioning of the bed in the room. It was an innocuous detail, but rang true for me.
10
@Vincent Amato
Considering the predictable horrid backlash, including death threats and harm to her career, exactly what motivation did Christine Blasey Ford have to lie? What did she possibly have to gain to be willing to enter the public opinion meat grinder?
What motivation did Kavanaugh have to lie should Blasey Ford’s story be the truth?
21
@Vincent Amato I also thought he damaged himself when he became angry. I also wondered how much of this was caused by sleep deprivation.
2
Ever since Bush v Gore and Citizens United, the SCOTUS has lost its gravitas as a third branch of the republic. Kavanaugh (much more egregious than Thomas) like Thomas crossed the line with women but was never held accountable. Instead he threw tantrum and it worked.
But then there is the POTUS & the obsequious, corrupt Republican Senate. The end! Full stop! Now it's just a charade, a faux democracy.
91
@sandras
Since Bush v Gore? Don't know much about history?
Look up the etymology of "borking" if you want to know how the Supreme Court lost its gravitas. First the left politicized the court. Then it used the "politics of personal destruction" in an attempt (partially successful) to prevent a "strict constructionist" majority on the court. Kavanaugh was just the latest victim of those tactics.
The story largely boils down to abortion -- and some other legal victories given the left by a politicized court. The left realized that Roe v Wade and other decisions handed down by the court could never survive an honest reading of the Constitution, and so it has waged a scorched earth campaign against the court and nominees who might endanger Roe.
It has been one of the most disreputable periods in American history.
3
sorry, but i just groaned when blasey-ford came forward. this could not end well for the same reasons that make it near impossible to deal with any sexual assault. by definition, this is not typically a crime with a lot of witnesses, so it usually comes down to he said/she said -- and in our "innocent until proven guilty" world the onus is on the accuser to prove the case. the defense need only deny, deny, deny -- and destroy the accuser's credibility. works like a charm even when there's physical evidence -- she just changed her mind? does anyone not understand why the pleas to "listen to the accuser"? especially given the audience for all of this, could anyone expect a different outcome?
10
I found the allegations of misconduct so believable not only because of those reporting it, but also because of personal experience with these young darlings who are the toast of society, and the bane of women who not part of the power circle.
Every time I see his face, I come to hate Mitch McConnell more. He is a thief, and he is no patriot.
I'm sure he doesn't care, but he should. I'm not the only one out here who feels that way.
133
The Supreme Court is now stained by Trump with a Supreme Court justice who a majority of Americans believe lied to Congress aboout a sexual assault.
69
@Mary Ann Hutto-Jacobs
Or lied about his drinking habits in his youth.
2
The mere fact that both Thomas and Kavanaugh are on the bench is a slap in the face to all women. The fact that Kavanaugh is essentially a conservative shill is a slap in the face to the idea of a non-partisan Judicial Branch.
119
Your “credible” witness, Dr Ford, is my non-credible witness. I didn’t and still don’t believe her testimony, at all.
15
It is so sad that men like Thomas and Kavenaugh are sitting on the US Supreme Court when they should be ostracised for treating women as they have done. We indeed have two very angry men on the SCOTUS who are furious that they were caught and I am sure they are determined to make those of us who see thru their facade pay dearly.
40
Why didn't the Obama Administration sue over the denial of a Garland hearing?
The belligerence of Kavanaugh and his love of beer tells a lot.
The court is illegitimate in my book.
77
Kavanaugh is hated for the same reason as Clarence Thomas: he's a smart, creative jurist who doesn't buy into the left's philosophy. Mediocrities like Ruth Marcus can target him all they want, but he's here to stay. And the Supreme Court—today and twenty years ahead—will be the better for it.
11
@Michael Livingston’s
First time in all these decades I've heard someone describe Thomas as "smart."
And it may be the last.
8
@Michael Livingston’s
What? What has Justice Thomas done in his tenure? Creative? Only in his ability to make tangential arguments that have no real meaning. Thomas is a joke. We shall see about Kavanaugh.
6
What this reviewer doesn't understand is that for the Republican party, there is no distinction between the good of the country and the fortunes of the party itself.
It's years since the American Enterprise Institute's "Norm" Ornstein, that bell-weather of both-sidesism, declared the Republican party an outlying force of destruction which has abjured all decency and all rules.
And yet American media plays along, as if all this is mere politics.
25
"If Kennedy did argue for his former law clerk, it was a disturbing intervention across the lines separating the judicial and executive branches — but also a successful one."
Exactly. If the current President had any integrity or ethics whatsoever—and those words will never be said in any connotation with Donald Trump—he would have not taken the meeting with Kennedy, citing just the Constitution (something Donald Trump has never read).
Blasey Ford, of course. But the real reason Kavanaugh doesn't belong on SCOTUS is that he's a judicial lightweight, whose connections in the conservative Washington GOP circles have gotten him where he is.
Shame on those people.
51
Why should anyone be surprised that the Republicans put a Supreme Court Justice in office who was accused of attacking a woman? Does anyone recall that they also put a president in office who came in under the same cloud? Wake up, everyone, this is the Republican party in all their finery.
57
@joyce Actually, Clinton is a Democrat.
2
Credible testimony, you say?
“Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter. . . .”
No normal person answers a soft ball question like that. Unless he/she has an agenda mightily encouraged by the Left. And where has she been for over 35 years? Credible? No way.
12
@frankie boy
Except for maybe a Psychology professor. She’s referring to her particular field of study. If you had listened to the entire testimony it would make more sense.
Again, it was explained why she felt it was inportant to come forward now—if you followed the testimony. Also, it’s not at all unusual for women to not step forward, precisely because of the type of response they get.
As I understand it, she’s had to move at least four times, can’t return to her job, and still is receiving multiple threats against her and her family.
She was extremely credible. There was no reason for her to step forward and have her life destroyed.
3
Kavanaugh's melt-down during his confirmation testimony, revealed who he really was...This would never have happened to this extent, in past Supreme Court nomination hearings .
47
The bottom line is that Kavanaugh revealed himself with his angry lashing out to be a highly partisan person totally lacking in judicial behavior. He should not be on the Court.
122
And still, to this day, not a single corroborating witness to Blasey-Fords concocted story that even she can't remember the details of. The Democrats should be ashamed. And these are the social justice warriors crying "innocent until proven guilty!" Imagine if this vague evidence were used to prevent a minority from receiving an offer of employment? Can you imagine the outcry?
Even Ford's "good friend" is questioning her story now. What a disgrace the Dems are.
15
I'm reading entirely too many books about unpleasant people which we seem to have now in stupifying number. Kavanaugh will have to wait. Sorry, Ruth.
8
In the end the conclusion was that truth doesn't really matter, it's the connections you have that does. This country will be suffering through a lop sided Supreme Court for many years to come.
13
I think its obvious that the Repubs in general no longer are concerned about ethics, or illegal acts, or even criminal behavior,Its getting and keeping power and making sure the"enemies do not get it ,its total loyalty to their cause.
The voting for candidates that are under indictment for crimes by Repub voters, the denial of any illegal acts by these guys, the foolish explanations to try and coverup, and the total loyalty to the"cause" is what matters.
33
The so-called hearing and investigation was a farce.
As a man, I thought his behavior was despicable.
At his hearing and as the action of which he was accused.
No, I would never have a beer with this guy.
i have not been a Republican since beforeNixon and see no way I would become one now.
29
K is a blot on the Supreme Court and also on folks like Mitch and Sussan Collins. His testimony at his confirmation hearings was at the very least shocking, His immaturity and blatant pandering to trump should have kept him off the Court. How long can our democracy hold up with such goings on? If I didn't dislike the man so much I would read the book.
30
If Trump won't read the daily one page intelligence report it's absurd to think he has really read this book. His criticism is simply a made up tirade from the pit of partisanship.
20
If the current tendency toward one-party rule by Republican loyalists continues our country is doomed. The Republican Party died in 2016. I am hopeful, though that this aberration of the last few years is about to change Clearly, Kavanaugh's nomination is one of the reasons the House gained a clear Democrat majority. The testimony of Fiona Hill and Maria Yovanovitch will no doubt lead to a Democrat clean sweep next November.
If the rumors about Kavanaugh's "debts," who paid them and why are finally proven, his impeachment and removal will follow in due course.
I predict country over party will resume once the Democrats are in control again. It will give the whatever party organization replaces the current fascist elements in the GOP some time to come to their senses again. There have always been differences between the two parties, but each acknowledged the other's right to exist.
We have a republic, if we can keep it. Let's keep it.
25
I believed Dr. Ford then, and I believe her now. As noted in some of the other comments, this was not a trial, this was a job interview for which integrity and objectivity should be the primary qualifications. Brett Kavanaugh failed on both counts. The Republicans who voted to confirm certainly furthered their own agenda, but they also further eroded any claims of integrity or objectivity for themselves or the Supreme Court.
38
There once were too many lawyers now there are too many politicians who put their own agenda, whatever it may be, ahead of the interests of the country.
10
What I’ve never understood is why no one seemed to care how or by whom about 2 million in debt was magically paid for Kavanaugh in early 2017. First, how did he amass such a huge debt and, more importantly, to whom is he beholden for that pay off? I suspect the truly disqualifying information is in the answers to those questions.
68
Kavanaugh’s rant in the Senate should have disqualified him, entirely apart from the accusations and their veracity.
His confirmation is a blot on the Senate, on the Court, and on the Republic.
43
I haven’t read this book, but from Mr. Cohen’s review it does not seem to tread any new ground, just a more lengthy recap of the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. Keep in mind that not one shred of evidence was presented at these hearings that might have questioned Mr. Kavanaugh’s qualifications for the Supreme Court. We were treated to days of hearsay, of “he said, she said,” and most of it dating back 30 or more years! So-and-so says he saw this, when most people can’t remember what they saw two or three days ago! Mr. Cohen should look back at the modern history of the Court, at the years when the Warren/Brennan faction ruled the court with its loose interpretation of the constitution. We survived quite well, as we will survive through the years of a court that may take a more orthodox view of the Constitution — or may not! Mr. Cohen in his review sees “something more profound at stake: whether on the most important questions, our nation is capable of putting the public interest ahead of partisanship, and whether the truth matters. The forces aligned for partisanship are stronger than ever.” He might want to address that question to Messrs. Schiff and Nadler in their hyper-partisan effort to impeach the president.
6
@Joe Gagen
" Keep in mind that not one shred of evidence was presented at these hearings that might have questioned Mr. Kavanaugh’s qualifications for the Supreme Court."
Certainly Mr. Kavanaugh's own testimony and demeanor was adequate evidence that he was ufit to it on any court.
But, as Mr. Trump put it, I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot someone and get away with it. Of course, in New York h would not get away with it, but Republicans would most assuredly say that it has nothing to do with being president. Indeed, Republican apologists see nothing disqualifying in any unlawful or immoral activity by any of their supporters
8
Since the confirmation, Christine Blasey Ford has been at least partially debunked. Her close friend (whom she claimed was a witness) and even her own father apparently don’t believe her.
The article says “The main reason the case against Kavanaugh failed, however, was that there simply was no audience for it”. The actual reason is that there was no evidence for it.
9
@Bill
Nothing has been “debunked”.
Her father, whom she hasn’t had much of a relationship with, is the president of the extremely exclusive Burning Tree golf club, the male-only DC area club frequented by Senators & Supreme Court justices. It’s an invitation-only club which automatically extends memberships to Supreme Court justices—the males, at least. No females are allowed on the grounds of the club.
Mr. Blasey’s club is near & dear to his heart, and Dr. Ford knew he would never jeopardize his standing there, which he hasn’t. She never expected any support from him.
As for her friend, she never had any knowledge of what occurred. Ford said she believed her friend was at the house that night, but her friend had no memory of it.
Whatever her relationships are with these people, they aren’t in a position to debunk anything.
2
Does the book explain the curious case of money in Kavanaugh's life - how and why he accumulated so much debt and how it all mysteriously was paid off? There is a lot about Kavanaugh that doesn't add up and money is a big factor in all of it. Including the role of Kennedy's son in approving Trump loans.
47
Interested to read the book and to learn whether it discusses the relationship between the work done for Trump at Deutsche Bank by Justice Kennedy’s son. That’s a topic that still deserves more investigation and discussion.
25
I notice that the majority of people who discount Blasey Ford's testimony are men. That's because a large percentage of women have had a similar traumatizing sexual experience in the past, and we all know that you might not remember the exact date or location of the incident, but you NEVER forget who it was that caused that trauma. Not in 30 years, not in 50. We watched her testimony and believed her. That's something a man just can't understand.
46
There is a big difference between “evidence” and credible evidence. K was confirmed because there was no credible evidence against him.
5
The Democrats have now perfected show trials - a lot of hoopla but minimal evidence and dubious witnesses. What's worse is that many parts of the media are all to ready to amplify that show. We saw it with Kavanaugh and we're seeing again with the Trump impeachment.
6
@Grace
That is a bunch of huey. The only thing your party did during the impeachment inquiry is denigrating career diplomats and try to make good media soundbites. The GOP is a joke. Showmanship is definitely their strong suit. Integrity and honor-not so much.
5
I’ve just finished the book and it was a fascinating but discouraging read. It confirms what most suspect, that Washington is a very tight network of privileged white men who have virtually no understanding of the world in which the majority of our citizens live. Most of these men are old and are ill prepared to plan for a qualitatively different future for our country. They depend on special interest lobbyists to write policy that becomes law. We now have a Supreme Court that is beholden to antiquated ideas and interests and that is blind to justice. I have grown sympathetic with those who voted for Trump wanting change but they have been severely deluded into thinking anything is different. He has only introduced a new cast of greedy players.
Marcus’s final chapter was a huge disappointment. I expected a better analysis and final thoughts.
46
The Kavanaugh confirmation hearings were damaging on many accounts. The democrats mismanaged Ford's statement with regards to her accusations against Kavanaugh- they should have pursued the complaints earlier and more publicly. When Kavanaugh was being questioned- not one Democrat called him out for clearly stating that he believed this was "a political hit job". No Democrat asked him if his angry response and biased view was appropriate given that he was being considered for a lifetime appointment to our highest court. However, the bigger issue in our country is that there is no room for a testimony from Kavanaugh that he was responsible for his behavior as a young man but that he had matured and understood that he behavior was inappropriate and wrong. Kavanaugh's testimony could have moved the country forward with regards to acknowledging the issue of sexual violence against women (even when is doesn't end in rape). The consequences of a truly honest testimony would have gotten him removed from consideration immediately. Kavanaugh, as with Clarence Thomas, put on the show he needed - outrage at the thought that he could have behaved poorly, outrage at the damage to his reputation! He got the confirmation and the reputation of the court is compromised.
90
@Anita Colasante It is worth recalling that he was not a “man” when the alleged incident occurred. He was a 17 year old boy.
2
Over 2000 law school professors objected to Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation, but hey, they weren’t in the Senate. Judge Kavanaugh’s scary confirmation rant was unlike anything I have ever seen by any nominee for anything. Even as Bork was eviscerated during his confirmation hearing, he held it together. Conversely, Kavanaugh’s partisan tirade made clear that there were not even shreds of judicial demeanor. Just a guy throwing a fit that he wasn’t getting what he wanted. Chief Justice Roberts will have to work long and hard to restore confidence in one of our greatest institutions. For the sake of the country I hope that he can do so. PS Trump’s trashing of the book makes want to read it.
231
@Meryl g : I totally agree. Kavanaugh showed himself incapable of judicial temperament, of rational though disengaged from personal benefit. He looked like an angry drunk, who is furious because he believes he's owed what some people are questioning that he deserves. Heaven help us.
15
@MA yankee He looked like a child having a tantrum.
4
It's over. SCOTUS has become no different from the US Senate. It is composed of lawyers (of course), with lifetime appointments who are total and complete partisans. They vote party line, they are 'whipped' on important votes, and they have ridiculous explanations to explain their votes which often just defy belief, not to mention imagination. They insult us with 'opinions' which are thinly-veiled screeds of party doctrine, but with more footnotes than Senators use in their defenses of votes. It will be 5-4 decisions as far out as we can see.
111
Most certainly, the existence of the Federalist Society, with their mission to get Conservatives named to the SC, is one of the main reasons we have such an imbalance on the SC and why it is looked upon as being partial. There are many who now see at the Federalist Society as being a type of domestic terrorist organization. Is there a comparable organization that tries to unbalance the SC from the left? I don’t think so.
82
@Charles
James Baker used SCOTUS to put George W. Bush in the White House.
We saw how that worked out for the country.
9
Blasey Ford's testimony was emotionally credible, but lacked any factual credibility. In fact it was so far from having any support...even from her friends at the time who were there...that it should have never been allowed. As far as the others who came forth after she did, as the writer and reviewer conveniently neglect to even mention their stories were shown to be manufactured.
You really think that in this day and age of wanting your 15 minutes of fame, or just thinking that throwing out a story (or being mentally unbalanced) to damage a person who you dislike for other personal or professional reasons you will not find three or four people who will make stuff up?
Yes, even a single proven allegation is enough to kill a nomination, or a career, or a reputation. But the operative word here is proven and these were not. Not even close by any legal standard...and not even in any logical analysis.
29
@Alex Trent ,
I don't know what you are looking at. I should nothing is enough to kill a a nomination, as this senate will never, ever override one. How do you "prove" an allegation in the confirmation process? Basically anybody who isn't already in prison can and will be be confirmed.
6
They weren’t allowed to be investigated. You can not dismiss allegations as ‘unproven’ when FBI officials were denied the opportunity to question witnesses that may have corroborate testimony.
How do you know Blasey-Ford is lying? McConnell didn’t want the investigations to move into a potentially Dem leading congress, so the clock was ticking.
I don’t mind people disagreeing with the outcome of what happened, but you need to better understand the facts of why it happened to coherently disagree.
22
“His arrival also means that two of the nine justices joined the court despite credible charges of serious misconduct toward women”
Yes; and two more (Roberts and Alito) were appointed by George W. Bush, who ascended to the presidency via Supreme Court fiat. And the final conservative, Gorsuch, was appointed after Mitch McConnell stole the seat from Merrick Garland.
A fine record for the conservative bloc.
158
@JDH And a fine record also for the Democrats who are so easily rolled over by the Republicans time after time which began in earnest when the Democrats meekly surrendered the 2000 election.
17
Adam states: “something even more profound [is] at stake: whether, on the most important questions, our nation is capable of putting the public interest ahead of partisanship, and whether the truth matters.”
This remark makes the issue sound like “the nation” is engaged in these issues. But mainly the nation is not involved. The issues are being decided by very well organized and deep-pocketed propaganda machines. The obvious components of this machine are Fox, Facebook, talk radio, and Murdoch/Spencer press and TV. The more insidious aspects are organizations like ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) that writes right-wing extremist bills it gets passed by Congress and State Legislatures.
The polarization and stupification of America on an industrial scale is so far unopposed.
76
Our Founding Fathers decided that the best way to govern our country was to have three equal branches of government, basically, the Presidency, the Congress and the Supreme Court. I find it incredible that today's Republicans have allowed the President to effectively take over the whole government. And the fact that the President is Donald Trump makes it even more incredible. On second thought, maybe the only way the Republicans could do it was to have a person like Trump, who has no scruples at all, and who doesn't have a Presidential bone in his body, become President. These are very dangerous times for our democracy.
63
This man is a disgrace. It is a scar on our country that he sits on the Supreme Court.
378
Stop saying Blasey Ford's testimony was credible. It was not. It was uncorroborated and should never have seen the light of day. Ford is a hyper-partisan with an agenda that happens to fit your narrative. Everyone, particularly a nominee for any office, deserves due process. The Kavanaugh hearings were an atrocity perpetrated by the Democrats. Vote all of them out in 2020.
36
@Mark V The reason it was less corroborated than it should have been is that Trump did not allow the FBI to do a complete and fulsome investigation. Many Yale classmates came forward, and the FBI refused to interview them. Regardless, his snarling attitude displayed the opposite of a judicial temperament.
168
@Mark V "Uncorroborated" because congress (thank you Mitch McConnell and Chuck Grassley) and the FBI made the most superficial investigation possible in order to win Jeff Flake's support of the nomination. These are established facts, unlike assertions that Ford was "hyperpartisan" and "imprecise."
96
@Mark V I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "uncorroborated." There was actually a third man in the room as the assault was taking place, and in a real investigation, that man would have been interviewed, whether or not he felt like talking to the authorities.
151
Her testimony was anything but “precise”. She would have been cut to ribbons in a real court. Oh, and he has a Lifetime appointment, a good thing!
26
@Pjlit Blasey Ford was cross-examined by an attorney acting on behalf of the Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Your argument that she "would have been cut to ribbons in a real court" is baseless.
I also remind you that Kavanaugh was not facing a criminal trial. He essentially was at a job interview, for which there was no requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
69
Look at that! We can disagree without insulting one another! Have a happy and healthful season!
@J and no presumption of innocence and no burden of proof on the democrats. These are concepts that apply in criminal proceedings and when one loses a government job. People just throw this stuff out there because the lives of Graham and McConnell have misused these arguments and still are with the Ukraine probe.
2
Kavanaugh reached the Supreme Court not for his legal and judicial chops, but due to his cozy relationships among the Republican conservative upper crust. In a very real sense, he is the quintessential example of white male privilege.
Throughout his rise through the courts, hardly anyone thought of Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court-level jurist, but instead as someone who drank a lot but had good friends who could pass him along and upwards to the highest court in the land.
You could say that he is the consummate example of the Peter principle -- a person who has reached the level where his incompetence will be painfully obvious and an utter disaster for American jurisprudence.
383
When I watched Kavanaugh's "I like beer" rant, I thought he was toast. Grown men with integrity do not act this way and become Supreme Court Justices. Then again, there is Trump who became President.
We are living in a world now where up is down and wrong is right, folks. Nothing should surprise us.
Yet I've seen signs that Kavanaugh may be trying to redeem himself. The majority opinion he wrote for tossing the Curtis Flowers case because it was racially biased, shows that he can ask difficult questions and think within an historical context.
Can he pull himself out of a mold of expectations? I'm holding out hope that he will be the next David Souter.
71
Republicans today care nothing for norms of decency or honesty; they care only about power.
Nixon resigned because he understood that it was the right thing to do.
Doing the right thing is not a thing Republicans today will ever do.
216
@No name - i think nixon resigned because he didn't want the word "impeach" attached to his name. Please don't give him so much credit.
25
I believe the same ethic is at work here as in the Trump phenomenon: both have been given a pass using the theocrat's argument invoking the men as God's imperfect tools that nevertheless get the job done; are the "right" men for the job; are, therefore, not to be held accountable; are above the law; unimpeachable; and the rest of us are tasked to "get over it."
301
@NKF Those are ignorant theocrats that argue for God's imperfect tools. In reality they are proposing that the ends justify the means. But in classical ethics the ends can never justify the means.
9
A sad moment in our history, surpassing the painful farce that was Anita Hill's hearing.
144
It is SO disheartening to have - and lose - this same argument again nearly 30 years later.
22
"Given the ethical obligation of judges to act at all times in ways that promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, his outbursts should have been disqualifying."
The most disturbing (& revealing) aspect of the hearings was the fact that none of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee challenged (or even, by all appearances, noticed) Kavanaugh's direct accusations & partisan fit. They were so fixated on Blasey Ford's credible but unproveable accusation, and on the market for gender politics, they ignored the most self-disqualifying performance imaginable.
47
@Martin You are 100%right when you say "The most disturbing (& revealing) aspect of the hearings was the fact that none of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee challenged (or even, by all appearances, noticed) Kavanaugh's direct accusations & partisan fit. "
And Sen. Klobuchar is most guilty. When Kavanaugh angrily asked her if she had a drinking problem, she shrank from the moment instead of saying "I'm a US Senator and this is a hearing to determine if you should sit on the Supreme Court. If this is how you conduct yourself in Court or treat those who come before you, you are totally unqualified to sit on the Court." Instead she wimpered. I couldn't believe it when I saw it and shouted out loud that she had just lost the chance to defeat his nomination. Any chance she had for recovery disappeared because the hearing went to break and McGhan told Kavanaugh to apologize and the moment was lost. And then he continued his mad dog attack because he knew the Dems would not challenge him. And Klobuchar lost my support for President.
16
@Martin - BINGO! Democrats were too busy showing what big supporters they are of the Me Too movement that they forgot to use strategies to actually win. I hope they are proud of their performances that showed how thoughtful and disturbed they were by what Christine Blasey Ford went through...yet was 100% ineffective in achieving their goals and basically threw away Blasey-Ford’s courageous decision to testify.
I’m afraid the same thing is happening now w/ the Democratic presidential primaries. Candidates like Warren and Sanders are too busy shooting for the moon and showing how they can “dream big” that they are forgetting that they need to actually win first. What’s most disturbing is their willingness to alienate moderate Democrats and independents who are the ones they need most to win in tight elections.
Our country will continue to remain in the toilet as long as Democrats don’t wise up and figure out how to fight and win against the Republicans.
3
The Kavanaugh confirmation provides a textbook case for what has become of public service for the common good. And it reveals a partisan Republican contempt for strong and principled women like Blasey-Ford.
Strong-armed Republican manipulation of political processes like Supreme Court nomination - combined with voter suppression and the duplicitous spinning of the false narratives being trafficked to protect Trump from impeachment - all of these calculated right - wing strategies and practices are pushing us toward a dangerous and dispiriting authoritarianism.
376
@Jake1982 For anyone involved in the ongoing struggle to lift women out of second-class citizenship in the US, Republican contempt for women is as obvious as their party platform.
64
@Kathy Well stated! Everyone who understands this needs to act on that understanding .
19
@Jake1982
Well said.
10