Judge Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh confirmed to Supreme Court after bitter fight, securing rightward shift

The Senate voted Saturday to confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, marking the end to one of the most rancorous confirmation fights in modern times and securing a rightward shift on the nation’s highest court. The chamber voted 50-48 to confirm Kavanaugh, mostly along party lines, after a weeklong FBI probe helped settle concerns among most wavering senators about the sexual assault allegations that nearly derailed his nomination and led to a dramatic second hearing. Saturday’s roll call marked the tightest successful Supreme Court confirmation vote in over 100 years, closer than even that of Clarence Thomas who similarly faced sexual misconduct allegations. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., was the sole Democrat to vote “yes.” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, was a “no,” but voted “present” as a courtesy to Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., who was attending his daughter’s wedding in Montana. Kavanaugh was scheduled to be sworn in as an associate justice of the court on Saturday night. Democrats reacted to the vote by urging supporters to turn out to the polls in November for the midterms. “The American people are raising their voices to a deafening roar today. We will not stop marching, we will not stop fighting, and we will vote on Election Day for leaders who share our values.” Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez said in a statement. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said it was a “heartbreaking day for women, girls and families across America.” She also announced she is filing a Freedom of Information Act request so the public can view documents connected to the FBI’s background investigation into sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh. “The conduct of the Senate Republican Majority did violence to the reputation of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Supreme Court. We must proceed in a judicious manner to set the record straight and ensure that this never happens again,” she said. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnnell, R-Ky., brushed off criticism from Democrats and said it was “a good day for America and an important day for the Senate.” “We stood up for the presumption of innocence, we refused to be intimidated by the mob of people coming after Republican members at their homes and hallways,” he said. “I applaud and congratulate the U.S. Senate for confirming our GREAT NOMINEE, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, to the United States Supreme Court,” President Trump tweeted. “Later today, I will sign his Commission of Appointment, and he will be officially sworn in. Very exciting!” The result was all but secured Friday night when undecided Sens. Manchin and Susan Collins, R-Maine, announced they would vote to confirm Kavanaugh, along with Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who threw a curveball into the process when he requested the supplemental background probe last week as a virtual condition for support. Collins, on the Senate floor Friday, dismissed claims that Kavanaugh would be an extremist judge, and said the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh failed to meet the “more likely than not” standard. The explosive battle over his seating as the ninth justice extended Saturday into the vote itself, with protesters shouting from the gallery and packing the Capitol and Supreme Court grounds – vowing to inflict payback against Republicans in November, and indicating Kavanaugh will be a lightning rod for years to come. “A vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh today is a vote to end this brief, dark chapter in the Senate’s history and turn the page toward a brighter tomorrow,” McConnell said ahead of the vote, over which Vice President Pence presided.

YEAH!!!!!  Thank God this circus is FINALLY over.  And, thank God the rule of law, and the presumption of innocence (a hallmark of our system of judgement, and indeed in most of western civilization) won the day.  As for the politics..  Trump can claim a HUGE (or “YUGE”) victory lap.  Promise made, promise kept.  Wow..    Congrats to Justice Brett Kavanaugh!    🙂

Coulter: Whatever It Takes

The Democrats’ current position on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh is: We cannot have someone addicted to beer on our highest court! What if a foreign power were to ply him with this nectar in a can? Talk about taking control of our government! Suppose they throw in a case of Weihenstephaner Hefeweissbier? A bitter college roommate is going whole hog, wailing, He lied about being a beeraholic. By the media’s account, Kavanaugh was a bounder, a brawler and a drunk. And yet he still managed to graduate at the top of his class, go to Yale, then to Yale Law and work in the highest positions in government. I am in awe of his manliness. Hemingway has nothing on this guy! He should be our president. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln after being told Ulysses S. Grant was a drunk, let’s find out what Kavanaugh drank and send a barrel of it to every college student. At least the Democrats seem to have moved on from the Crazy Ladies Who Must Be Believed. Kavanaugh’s first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, doesn’t remember the time or place of the alleged high school groping, and all four witnesses she named deny any memory of such a party. Forcing our first one-week delay, we were told that the poor lady was so traumatized by being groped in high school that she couldn’t fly. It was the worst thing that ever happened to her, compelling her to do what any reasonable person would under the circumstances: Add a second front door to her house. She was supposedly terrified of small spaces, and an airplane, one of her friends told CNN, “was the ultimate closed space where you cannot get away.” Then we found out that Ford regularly jets off to Hawaii, Costa Rica, the South Pacific islands and French Polynesia … to go surfing, one of the most terrifying activities around. It sounded like a joke. I was so shattered and broken, I could only go rock climbing in the Grand Tetons. After that, I’d repair to my room and curl up in a fetal position. Then I’d go rock climbing again. An ex-boyfriend has come forward to say that in six years of dating Ford, she never mentioned a sexual assault, had no fear of flying, lived comfortably in a tiny home with only one front door, once coached a friend on how to take a polygraph, contrary to her sworn testimony — and also lied about stealing $600 from him. Kavanaugh’s second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, jumped in to help, dusting off a memory of the nominee pulling a Bill Clinton on her as a freshman in college — but only after she spent a week huddled with her attorney, “assessing her memories” and calling classmates to ask if they thought it was true. And did she have corroboration? She doesn’t need any! She’s a “survivor.” Even The New York Times — the newspaper that believed the Duke lacrosse rape case until about five minutes before the prosecutor was disbarred — said Ramirez didn’t have enough evidence to meet its standards. His third accuser, our heroine Julie Swetnik, is the woman produced by porn lawyer Michael Avenatti. She claims that she repeatedly attended gang rape parties in the 1980s — and she saw Brett Kavanaugh there! An ex-boyfriend says Swetnik once threatened to kill him and his unborn child; she had a restraining order taken out against her; was sued by an employer for engaging in “sexually offensive conduct,” making “false and retaliatory allegations” against co-workers and also lying about her educational background and work history. A Democrat and Emmy-winning meteorologist wrote a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee stating that, soon after he met Swetnik in the 1990s, she proposed group sex to him. Some years later, her own father told him to stay away, citing Swetnik’s psychological problems. She is now the Democrats’ leading contender for 2020. Poor Kate Snow of NBC News thought she had landed the interview of a lifetime when she sat down with Swetnik. Within about three questions, it became clear that she was talking to a lunatic. At that point, most of Snow’s energy went into hoping for a building-wide power failure to shut down the cameras. Of the four witnesses Swetnik provided to NBC, whom she claimed would confirm her story, one denied knowing any Julie Swetnik, one was dead, and two did not respond to the network, perhaps wishing they were dead too. By the end of the interview, Snow’s purse was missing. But the Democrats are energetic devils. They’ve been poring over Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook and exclaiming, He’s a beeraholic! With grim passion, they say, how dare you laugh at this? If he were a teetotaler, they’d say, We can’t have someone on the court who’s so nerdy. How can this weird aesthete sympathize with murderers and insider traders? They’ve already won a second week’s delay by having two deranged women scream at Sen. Jeff Flake in an elevator. After wetting himself, Flake insisted on a seventh FBI investigation. For weeks, the Democrats have been demanding an investigation — of an incident without witnesses, on a date unknown at a place unknown — by saying, Oh, you big babies, the FBI investigation of Anita Hill only took three days! The FBI wrapped up its investigation of Kavanaugh in a few days and then sat around wondering how long it had to wait before producing the report. So now the “it will only take three days” crowd is saying, Keep investigating! We don’t know how long the probe should be, but the minimum standards of decency require that it last at least until there’s a new president. Whatever they find, they will argue in the alternative and just keep doing it and doing it. If Kavanaugh stepped on a bug, PETA activists would be screaming at Flake in an elevator. The Democrats have a pair of twos, but they expect Republicans to fold. Why? Because that’s what Republicans always do! Unfortunately, this time, Kavanaugh’s supporters are not accepting surrender.

Let’s hope not, Ann..  Conservative firebrand Ann Coulter is responsible for that excellent piece.

Limbaugh: GOP Must Confirm Kavanaugh or Kiss Midterms Goodbye

So Chairman Grassley has a job to do here, because, if he gives Democrats enough time, they’ll produce a woman claiming to be Kavanaugh’s secret Russian wife who Trump paid to urinate on that bed in Moscow. If Grassley waits long enough, the Democrats will come up with the woman claiming to be Kavanaugh’s secret Russian wife. — he’s a bigamist, too, don’t you know — and Trump paid Kavanaugh’s second wife to hire a bunch of prostitutes to urinate on the bed Obama slept in while in Moscow. If Grassley doesn’t get a handle on this and just do — and I’ll tell you something else, which everybody also knows. If the Republicans do not get this vote taken and have Kavanaugh confirmed, you can kiss the midterms goodbye. You can kiss goodbye holding the House and you can kiss goodbye holding the Senate. Because whatever the Democrats think of their base, the one thing I know that if you guys fold on this and cave and keep bending over backwards… You’ve done that enough. You’ve demonstrated that you don’t hate women. You’ve demonstrated that you’re open minded. You’ve demonstrated that you’re gonna hear from her. You’re never gonna hear from her! She’s never gonna show up. She’s not telling a story that can be verified, Senator Grassley. She’s not gonna show up. If you guys don’t conduct this vote in defiance of all this and if Avenatti gets one foot in the door to a Senate committee to start telling his story, then you can kind of kiss good-bye Republican chances in the midterms in November. Because people are gonna logically say, “What good does it do?”

Agreed!  Worse..  If Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed, Republican voters will sit out the midterms altogether, and that so-called “blue wave” will come to fruition.  The “silent majority” voted for Donald Trump so that he could fix the economy and put conservative judges on the Supreme Court and other federal courts.  If this supremely (pun intended) qualified jurist with decades of experience and an impeccable record isn’t confirmed, Senate Republicans will face the wrath of their voter base…and rightly so.  Thanks to Rush Limbaugh for saying what needs to be said.  Dittos Rush!!

Opinion/Analysis: Thiessen: Ford vs. Kavanaugh — How much evidence do we need to destroy someone?

Christine Blasey Ford has accused Brett M. Kavanaugh of attempted rape while they were both in high school — a charge he unequivocally denies. She can’t remember the date the alleged attack took place. She isn’t even certain about the year (although she reportedly thinks it may have been the summer around the end of her sophomore year when she was 15). She can’t remember whose house she was in. She can’t remember how she got there. She says she didn’t tell anyone about it at the time, not even her closest friends — so there are no contemporaneous witnesses to back her claims. No other women have come forward to say that the young Kavanaugh assaulted them. There is no pattern of bad behavior. Quite the contrary, by all accounts other than Ford’s, he treats women with respect in his personal and professional life. (Full disclosure: I worked with Kavanaugh in the George W. Bush White House.) The gathering included just Ford and four others, according to her confidential letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. One man named by Ford as a witness has come forward and not only denied knowledge of the assault but also denied knowledge of the gathering in question. Another, who said he was the “PJ” mentioned in the letter, Patrick J. Smyth, has also denied being at a gathering like the one Ford described. Ford deserves to be treated with dignity, not maligned or attacked. But let’s not forget that Kavanaugh is human too. This ordeal affects not only him but also his family, including his two young daughters, who are hearing awful things said about the father they love. He cannot prove a negative. So far, there are accusations but no corroborating evidence. And accusations without evidence cannot be the standard by which a man’s reputation and career are ruined. Both Kavanaugh and Ford have been ill-served by Senate Democrats in this process. Feinstein, the Judiciary Committee’s ranking Democrat, knew about Ford’s accusation for about six weeks and did nothing. She never asked Kavanaugh about the allegations in private or in public. She did not use the confidential, bipartisan process that the Judiciary Committee uses every day to assess the credibility of allegations against hundreds of judicial nominees — which would have given Ford the chance to talk to the committee’s professional investigators in a confidential setting. Bizarrely, to this day Feinstein has not shared a copy of Ford’s unredacted letter with Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa. But Democrats appear not to have been too scrupulous when it came to protecting her confidentiality. Ford has also been ill-served by her lawyers, who initially stated that Ford “will agree to participate in any proceedings that she’s asked to participate in.” Then, when Grassley canceled the vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination and scheduled a hearing where she could testify in public or private, her lawyers started echoing Senate Democrats’ new message that a full FBI investigation was needed before she would speak to the committee — undermining the perception of Ford’s independence. (At this writing, she has reversed course yet again, with her lawyer now saying she might be willing to testify next week). It’s not the FBI’s job to investigate. There is no federal crime alleged. As Grassley explained in a letter, “We have no power to commandeer an executive branch agency into conducting our due diligence.”

Indeed..  Well said, Marc.  Marc Thiessen is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

French: Do Democrats Really Believe Christine Blasey Ford Doesn’t Have to Prove Her Claims?

There is something extremely curious about the course of the Brett Kavanaugh sexual-assault controversy thus far. At least based on the evidence and her conduct through today, Christine Blasey Ford seems to be making minimal effort to prove her case. In fact, with a strong assist from her Democratic allies, she seems to be making every effort not to prove her case. Absent an FBI investigation that’s not forthcoming and not necessary, she’s refusing to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, in essence asking that a single, unsworn letter be allowed to stand as the heart and soul of a claim that could alter history and destroy a man’s reputation. Democrats are only too happy to play along. At the foundation of our system of justice is the notion that accusers don’t just have to state a case against the accused, they have to prove their case. The burden of proof varies depending on the situation. At one end is the proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a criminal trial. At the other is the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard of civil court. But in virtually any court, when a person first states their case against an accused, that is just the beginning of the process of proof. Thus, when you hire an attorney as a plaintiff, it is to go on offense, to build your case, to substantiate your claims. What you cannot do — under any circumstances, in any competent court — is file your complaint, refuse to submit to questioning, fail to produce additional evidence or witnesses, and hope to prevail. In such circumstances, your case will be dismissed as a matter of law, tossed out of court for legal insufficiency — especially if, as in Ford’s case, not even the initial claim is submitted under oath. Yet from the beginning, Ford’s team — including her attorney, who is known to be aggressive in the service of her clients — has behaved as if she doesn’t have to prove her case, and as if the very request that she do so is itself fundamentally oppressive. She’s submitted her unsworn claim and then immediately gone into a defensive crouch, with allies such as New York senator Kirsten Gillibrand even claiming that having her testify at a Senate hearing would somehow “silence” her. The consistent demand for an FBI investigation — even when the FBI lacks jurisdiction over the alleged incident — is not by itself problematic. But conditioning her own testimony — the centerpiece of her case — on such an investigation is not what a person intent on proving her allegations would do. Kavanaugh, by contrast, has submitted to a formal interview, meaning he can be convicted of a felony if he lied. He’s stated that he’s willing to testify at an open hearing. Two other individuals have come forward to rebut Ford’s claims, including Mark Judge, the other man alleged to have been in the room during the attack. Their statements were also offered under penalty of legal sanction for lying. At present they and Kavanaugh are the only people on the record and at criminal risk if they lied. Unless Ford changes that fact — after being given ample opportunity to testify in public or private, in the Senate or at her home — Kavanaugh should be confirmed, and her claims against him shouldn’t be considered. They should be treated in the same way we treat claims that can’t survive a motion for summary judgment, claims not supported by any evidence in the record. Those are the stakes. By conditioning testimony on an FBI investigation, Ford and her Democratic allies are attempting to bring the worst possible form of campus “justice” to the national stage. As of this moment, they are actually seeking to derail a Supreme Court nomination and impugn the nominee’s character without a single piece of sworn evidence. Indeed, all the legally binding statements on the matter contradict the accuser. This cannot stand. Ford’s team has to either reverse course or drop its complaint. Yes, of course, testifying before the committee would be “partisan.” No, the members of the committee are not “neutral.” But that’s not just the reality of the Senate, it’s the fundamental reality of the justice system itself. It is an adversarial system. If you seek to prove your claim under any standard, you have to expose yourself to the most partisan possible scrutiny — cross-examination by a lawyer trained to find flaws in your testimony and paid to work relentlessly until he discredits your case. If Ford testifies, she’ll face a heightened version of the reality every plaintiff must confront. She’ll have adversaries, and she’ll have allies. It will be difficult, but it is necessary. Now, some caveats. It’s entirely possible that the instant we publish this piece, the next shoe drops, and it turns out that the defensive crouch was a delaying tactic, that Ford and the Democrats were busy investigating all along, and corroboration and substantiation are just around the corner. Or it’s possible that Ford was simply trying to apply as much pressure as she could, to achieve the most favorable circumstances for an interview possible before finally agreeing to testify under oath. But even if that’s true, it doesn’t change the fact that those now saying her testimony isn’t necessary — those claiming Kavanaugh should be rejected on the basis of her unsworn claim, a claim completely lacking in contemporary corroboration and contradicted by substantial evidence — are wholly and completely wrong. And it’s dangerous to our very system of justice to create or impose a standard that permits accusers to make accusations and then stand aside as suspicion alone is used to destroy reputations and ruin careers. Instead, those who make serious allegations — just like those who make claims in court — must be forced to support those claims. They must endeavor to substantiate their case, even under the lowest burden of proof. As of today, the energies of the Democrats are directed at denying that fundamental requirement of American justice. They cannot be allowed to prevail.

Agreed!  And well said, David.  David French is an attorney and Army Reserve officer (Major) who received the Bronze Star for his service in Iraq.  Dr. Ford needs to either testify under oath Monday, or the Senate should move forward with Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation.  It’s that simple.  Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) who head’s up the Senate Judiciary Committee has been more than accommodating to Dr. Ford and has offered her and her attorney’s multiple venues (both private and public) to testify under oath about this alleged incident 4 decades ago.  It’s time to move forward and confirm this extremely qualified federal judge and be done with this nonsense.

Elizabeth Warren slammed over editing of Kavanaugh video

U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass, drew criticism Tuesday after sharing a clip of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh discussing his days at Georgetown Preparatory School. The editing of the clip seemed designed to fuel the fire over the sexual misconduct allegations against the judge. In the short video posted on Warren’s Twitter page, Kavanaugh is heard speaking at Columbus Law School at the Catholic University of America in 2015 about his school years. “But fortunately we had a good saying that we’ve held firm to, to this day,” Kavanaugh says in the video. “As the dean was reminding me before the talk, which is ‘What happens at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep.’ That’s been a good thing for all of us, I think.” Warren quickly jumped to denounce Kavanaugh’s comments, which were revealed in the wake of the allegations of sexual misconduct raised by Christine Blasey Ford, who claims the high court nominee drunkenly forced himself on her during a house party nearly four decades ago. “I can’t imagine any parent accepting this view,” Warren tweeted. “Is this really what America wants in its next Supreme Court Justice?” But the clip shared by Warren, though first unearthed by MSNBC, cuts out Kavanaugh’s previous remarks indicating he’s talking about his three friends. “I, by coincidence, three classmates of mine at Georgetown Prep were graduates of this law school in 1990 and are really really good friends of mine,” Kavanaugh said in a recording of the full speech, naming his friends. “And they were good friends of mine then, and they are still good friends of mine as recently as this weekend when we were all on email together,” he added. He then made the “what happens at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep” joke. Mark Hemingway, a writer for the conservative Weekly Standard, slammed Warren for trying to suggest Kavanaugh was admitting improper behavior in the video rather than making a joke. “This has zero bearing on whether Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford, and the party of underage abortion and birth control on demand suddenly becoming neopuritans is a tad pathetic,” he tweeted. “Like MSNBC, Sen. Warren is passing around a truncated version of the Kavanaugh video, in which he makes a joke about three ‘really, really good friends of mine,’ in order to smear him,” Oklahoma attorney Gabriel Malor tweeted. “As we know, Warren is very comfortable misleading people. Her constituents deserve better,” he added, comparing Warren’s clip to a video posted by U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., which recently came under fire for depicting Kavanaugh as anti-women. Harris, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — which will decide if Kavanaugh gets a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court — tweeted out the clip earlier this month, which shows Kavanaugh mentioning the term “abortion-inducing drugs,” a term that Harris slammed as “a dog whistle for going after birth control.” But the fact-checkers didn’t find Harris’ commentary or the edited video even remotely accurate. The Washington Post gave the senator four Pinocchios, its most egregious rating, saying the post omitted crucial facts such as that Kavanaugh was actually quoting the terminology used by the plaintiff in a 2013 court case rather than stating his personal views. Even more partisan fact-checkers such like PolitiFact also found Harris’ attack wasn’t based on truth. “In Harris’ tweet, Kavanaugh appears to define contraception as abortion-inducing. But the video failed to include a crucial qualifier: ‘They said.’ In fact, he was citing the definition of the religious group Priests for Life. He has not expressed his personal view,” PolitiFact’s check said.

Both Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) are nauseating, agenda-driven, self-righteous, extreme-liberal liars.  Shame on both of them for such brazen deception!  Even the extreme liberal Washington Post gave Kamala “four Pinocchios” for her deceit!  Unfortunately this is par for the course with these two..  Judge Kavanaugh has an impeccable record, and fake story being promoted to derail his nomination is an insult to him, and frankly to the Senate.  He should be confirmed, and hopefully will be in the next week or two, and we can put an end to this ridiculous circus that is a national embarrassment.