Backing from senators puts Kavanaugh on track for U.S. Supreme Court

[rooster59]

Backing from senators puts Kavanaugh on track for U.S. Supreme Court

By Richard Cowan and Amanda Becker

 

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump's nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, looked headed for a lifetime job on the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday after two crucial senators said that sexual misconduct accusations against the judge would not prevent them from voting to confirm him.

 

If Kavanaugh is approved in a final Senate vote, likely on Saturday, Trump will have achieved a victory in his drive to consolidate conservative dominance of the nation's highest court and move the American judiciary rightward.

 

Two key senators, Republican Susan Collins and Democrat Joe Manchin, both seen as swing votes, said they would support Kavanaugh, after weeks of debate about sexual violence and the nominee's character and temperament that gripped the nation.

 

A sharply partisan battle over the nomination became an intense personal and political drama when university professor Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were high school students in Maryland in 1982.

 

Collins, in remarks on the Senate floor explaining her decision to back Kavanaugh, said Ford's accusations against him "fail to meet the more-likely-than-not standard."

 

As protesters in a Capitol Hill hallway shouted, "Shame! Shame! Shame!", Manchin told reporters an FBI investigation, which did not find corroborating evidence of Ford's accusations, was thorough.

 

“I believe Dr. Ford. Something happened to Dr. Ford. I don’t believe the facts show that it was Brett Kavanaugh, but I believe something happened,” Manchin said.

 

Two other women also made accusations of sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh in the 1980s. He denied those accusations, as well as Ford's, in angry testimony to a Senate committee.

 

If confirmed, Kavanaugh would tip the court's balance to a 5-4 conservative majority in possible legal battles ahead over contentious issues such as abortion rights, immigration, and Trump's attempt to ban transgender people from the military.

 

Republicans hold a 51-49 majority in the U.S. Senate, and with the two key senators choosing to vote in favour of Kavanaugh, the confirmation looked locked-in late on Friday.

 

Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, a group that opposes Trump’s judicial nominees, said Kavanaugh would join the court "with a cloud over his head."

 

"He will be an illegitimate justice, and his confirmation will mark a point of no return for the Supreme Court's reputation as the one, apolitical branch of government,"  Fallon said.

 

HEADED FOR THE COURT

 

In theory, Kavanaugh could be confirmed, sworn in and sitting on the mahogany bench in the traditional black justice's robe by Tuesday, when the court is next in session. White House officials have said Kavanaugh would be sworn in swiftly.

 

The Kavanaugh fight has riveted Americans just weeks before Nov. 6 elections in which Democrats are trying to take control of Congress from the Republicans.

 

Several recent polls show that Republican enthusiasm about voting, which had lagged behind Democrats, jumped after a contentious Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week.

 

But Democrats say women angered at the Kavanaugh accusations will turn out in large numbers to vote out Republicans.

 

Trump, himself accused by numerous women during the 2016 presidential election of sexual misconduct, tweeted his approval of the Senate vote on Friday, saying, "Very proud of the U.S. Senate for voting 'YES' to advance the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh!"

 

Senators had backed Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge, in a procedural vote earlier on Friday that moved the Republican-controlled Senate toward a definitive decision.

 

Trump has made appointing conservative judges a major plank of his presidency, and last year his nominee Neil Gorsuch was confirmed by the Senate.

 

Ford's testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee was broadcast live on television last Thursday and captured the attention of some 20 million people watching on broadcast and cable networks.

 

In an angry rebuttal later that day, Kavanaugh said the accusations were part of a "political hit" by Democrats.

 

His nomination became a flashpoint in the #MeToo social media movement against sexual harassment and assault.

 

Trump mocked Ford on Tuesday during a political rally in Mississippi, further angering Democrats and women campaigning for an end to sexual violence.

 

The FBI sent Congress documents detailing additional interviews about Kavanaugh that the agency conducted at the request of some Republican and Democratic senators.

 

While the documents have not been made public, Republicans said they did not back up sexual assault allegations by Ford, a psychology professor at Palo Alto University in California.

 

Similarly, Republicans said the FBI found nobody to support assault claims by Deborah Ramirez, who was a classmate of Kavanaugh's at Yale University in the 1980s.

 

Democrats called the FBI report a whitewash and said the White House placed constraints on the FBI, which did not speak to many potential witnesses.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-10-06

 

[lovelomsak]

2 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Collins, in remarks on the Senate floor explaining her decision to back Kavanaugh, said Ford's accusations against him "fail to meet the more-likely-than-not standard.

Collins showed a lot of class. She did not simply ride the tide of women are right men are wrong. She went with what was presented and how things worked out. She is a person well worth the position she holds. May many other young women look up to her and wish to become a like person. Not just a woman wanting to punishing men. Go Collins go set an example that many will cherish

[stevenl]

No backbone. Not because of the accusations, one can differ about that, but about his attitude and performance in the senate hearing.

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, lovelomsak said:

Collins showed a lot of class. She did not simply ride the tide of women are right men are wrong. She went with what was presented and how things worked out. She is a person well worth the position she holds. May many other young women look up to her and wish to become a like person. Not just a woman wanting to punishing men. Go Collins go set an example that many will cherish

With her wording she admits the FBI investigation was flawed.

So disagree with you, she shows no class and morality whatsoever.

[manarak]

14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

With her wording she admits the FBI investigation was flawed.

how so ?

[stevenl]

8 minutes ago, manarak said:

how so ?

A serious investigation would have reached a much clearer conclusion than ' more likely than not'.

[PatOngo]

2 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Trump, himself accused by numerous women during the 2016 presidential election of sexual misconduct, tweeted his approval of the Senate vote on Friday, saying, "Very proud of the U.S. Senate for voting 'YES' to advance the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh!"

Ah! The self proclaimed leader of the free world! It's ok to grab a ????????!  Onward and upward! God bless America!

Edited October 6, 2018 by PatOngo

[lannarebirth]

41 minutes ago, stevenl said:

A serious investigation would have reached a much clearer conclusion than ' more likely than not'.

I don't like this guy, even if I was a Republican, which I'm not. That said, I think you're wrong about the conclusion an investigation is expected to reach. "More likely than not" seems about right for the investigators burden of proof and then a prosecutor determines if they can turn that into "beyond a reasonable doubt" or whether or not "the preponderance of the evidence shows".

[Brunolem]

49 minutes ago, bendejo said:

 

Tell source of this pic, please.

 

 

Well, it was send to me by in long time contact of mine in California...of all places!

[lannarebirth]

54 minutes ago, bendejo said:

 

Tell source of this pic, please.

 

 

Quote

However, the pictured woman is not Dr. Ford, but rather Lyudmyla Kozlovska, a Ukrainian human rights activist seen below with her husband Bartosz Kramek at an anti-government protest in Warsaw in 2017:

 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ford-george-soros/

[alanrchase]

1 hour ago, bendejo said:

Edited post. Beaten to the link by the post above.

Edited October 6, 2018 by alanrchase
Already posted

[milwaukeeboy]

I listened to his testimony and think he was way too excited when talking about how much he likes beer.

I don't mind drunks as some of the nicest people are drunks. But at least they should admit it.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

I don't like this guy, even if I was a Republican, which I'm not. That said, I think you're wrong about the conclusion an investigation is expected to reach. "More likely than not" seems about right for the investigators burden of proof and then a prosecutor determines if they can turn that into "beyond a reasonable doubt" or whether or not "the preponderance of the evidence shows".

A good investigation would reach a much clearer conclusion and would have talked to the accuser, accused, other accusers, maybe polygraph of the accused, etc. This was flawed from the get go, and just a way to get out of this. Flake should have shown backbone, and all republican senators should show backbone now after the terrible performance of BK at the hearing.

[lannarebirth]

13 minutes ago, stevenl said:

A good investigation would reach a much clearer conclusion and would have talked to the accuser, accused, other accusers, maybe polygraph of the accused, etc. This was flawed from the get go, and just a way to get out of this. Flake should have shown backbone, and all republican senators should show backbone now after the terrible performance of BK at the hearing.

 

Well, I didn't watch any of that, so I don't know. I made up my mind on this guy based on his days as a political operative, which to my way of thinking automatically disqualifies someone from consideration for a high court position, regardless of party.

Edited October 6, 2018 by lannarebirth

[Tug]

A sad day he is straight up to partisan And that sham investigation leaves me unconvinced he dident overpower that child and feel her up im not convinced he did it eather btw 

Edited October 6, 2018 by Tug

[ncc1701d]

52 minutes ago, stevenl said:

A good investigation would reach a much clearer conclusion and would have talked to the accuser, accused, other accusers, maybe polygraph of the accused, etc. This was flawed from the get go, and just a way to get out of this. Flake should have shown backbone, and all republican senators should show backbone now after the terrible performance of BK at the hearing.

I agree with you 100%. However, one side called for the fbi investigation and now can’t complain about the outcome and that it didn’t turn out like they expected once the fbi finished it. They can complain about the fbi process, but that’s a different issue. 

 

I agree with with many other posters - his entire attitude during the questioning was like a child. 

Edited October 6, 2018 by ncc1701d

[Chomper Higgot]

Keep in mind this was not an’FBI investigation’ this was an ‘FBI background check’ the parameters of which were set by the White House.

 

If the Dems take the Senate then there will be a full FBI investigation.

[newnative]

    So, Collins thinks the evidence against BK did not reach 'more likely than not'.  This after a very rushed and very limited investigation of less than a week.  She believes Dr. Ford was sexually assaulted, but maybe not by BK. 

     Maybe the evidence didn't pass the threshold of more likely than not but, come on, the position is Supreme Court Justice for life, not County Clerk.   If it's maybe he did, maybe he didn't, that's not who you want on the Supreme Court.  Add to that his horrible behavior during the hearings, his playing fast and loose with the truth, and the other women who have come forward, it's clear that MK is unsuited for this high position. 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

A serious investigation would have reached a much clearer conclusion than ' more likely than not'.

At this length of time since the event, and with no serious witnesses supporting Ford, I doubt there was any evidence for an investigation to find proving it one way or the other. It's all hearsay and she said he said. If in doubt, the verdict must be not guilty.

However, this is going to make the liberals melt down.

 

If Kavenaugh is approved, Trump has done the job he wanted to do, even if he loses or does not stand in 2020.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, ncc1701d said:

I agree with you 100%. However, one side called for the fbi investigation and now can’t complain about the outcome and that it didn’t turn out like they expected once the fbi finished it. They can complain about the fbi process, but that’s a different issue. 

 

I agree with with many other posters - his entire attitude during the questioning was like a child. 

Yes, the call was for an FBI investigation. I'm sure they would have preferred a real investigation though, where the accuser, accused, other accusers etc would have been interviewed.

[stevenl]

27 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

At this length of time since the event, and with no serious witnesses supporting Ford, I doubt there was any evidence for an investigation to find proving it one way or the other. It's all hearsay and she said he said. If in doubt, the verdict must be not guilty.

However, this is going to make the liberals melt down.

 

If Kavenaugh is approved, Trump has done the job he wanted to do, even if he loses or does not stand in 2020.

So in your opinion an investigation where the accuser, accused, other accusers are not interviewed has any value?

[DrTuner]

2 hours ago, milwaukeeboy said:

I listened to his testimony and think he was way too excited when talking about how much he likes beer.

What an excellent choice for a judge, can't go wrong with a white straight beer drinking man. I bet he eats meat, too.

Edited October 6, 2018 by DrTuner
typo

[farcanell]

4 hours ago, PatOngo said:

Ah! The self proclaimed leader of the free world! It's ok to grab a ????????!  Onward and upward! God bless America!

Pretty sure he said you had to be rich and famous to get away with pussy grabbing.... (and shooting someone on the street, for fornications sake) so... god bless elitist rich Americans.

 

those not in that category will be treated differently.... and that’s the america you have

[atyclb]

i propose a weekend free of political bickering and goodwill to everyone on this forum.

 

MKGA

Edited October 6, 2018 by atyclb

[ncc1701d]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Yes, the call was for an FBI investigation. I'm sure they would have preferred a real investigation though, where the accuser, accused, other accusers etc would have been interviewed.

What would happen under normal circumstances (without all the Supreme Court circus), if normal every day people would have made the same accusation?

[Jonnapat]

Shameful after the events of the past couple of weeks 

[Thaidream]

I just find the whole scenario regarding vetting Judge Kavanaugh filled with mostly political nonsense-  Let's not forget Kavanaugh was an associate counsel to Ken Starr and was ultimately responsible for the evidence which impeached Bill Clinton. Obviously, there is alot of 'bad feelings' left over from that incident.  

 

It is extremely suspicious that  at the eleventh hour- a 'witness' who wants to remain anonymous appears- the Democratic leader on the Judiciary Committee has the letter for over 30 days- never gives it to the Republican majority member to order an FBI investigation. Finally,  Dr Ford is outed, provided with a lawyer recommended by the Democrats and is slated to tell her story./

 

I watched the complete  vetting of both Ford and Kavanaugh.  At no time did anyone ever ask Dr. Ford how she came to know Kavanaugh. They never asked had they ever met at any time before the incident. They never asked how Dr. Ford came to know  Mark  Judge who she alleges was in the room.  It is also interesting to note that not one person can remember a party (supposedly there were 4 other persons there) where K and all the other people were together.

 

I do believe Dr Ford suffered some kind of assault. I do not believe it was Kavanaugh and that somehow she has 'imagined' that it was he. While the latest FBI vetting found no corroboration of any assault by K- it's scope was limited . I would not vote against K based upon an allegation that cannot or was not proved.   The same with the other allegations from women-  not proven.

 

In regards to his drinking- he drank alot of beer- got drunk- sometimes stumbled. Let's remember this was High School and College.   However, he seemed to be sober enough to pass a very difficult  test to become a lawyer, He has held high positions in Government with an impeccable record for 26 years.   Never anyone making charges of  sexual harassment or drunken behavior. Again. I can't see voting against him for liking beer.

 

So, now we have his  testimony-  I don't see any lies but I do see a man angry and irritated and at times flippant. However, being under tremendous pressure and attacked  for what maybe a politically motivated  reason  might make one pretty angry.  He did later 'apologize' in writing  an Op Ed piece in the Wall Street  Journal.  I could;t vote against him simply for this.

 

However, I could possibly vote against him for his ultra conservative approach to legal arguments and interpretation of the Constitution.  He is technically qualified to be on the Supreme Court.

 

The real problem we have is the  huge divisions in the country between Repubs and Dems who want to win at all costs.  There appears to be no co-operation; no concept of fairness and decency; a rush to judgement and all fueled by a President that lacks any morality; comportment; truth and a desire to fulfill the wishes and desires of the people.  

 

My final comment for Trump and both the Dems and Repubs is simply this:  It's not about YOU-  it has to be about US- The people.

[welovesundaysatspace]

What a banana republic. 

[Morch]

5 hours ago, ncc1701d said:

What would happen under normal circumstances (without all the Supreme Court circus), if normal every day people would have made the same accusation?

 

Considering a lifetime appointment to the SC is by definition not equatable with "normal circumstances".

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.