That's irrelevant. It's Cavenaugh who is seeking a lifetime appointment to
the Supreme Court which rules on the laws of our country, and these laws
involve many issues including labor rights, gbun laws, women's health, LGBT
rights, and people of all political persuasions. So he needs to pass a test
of morality and impartiality that is higher than people who are not aspiring
to a Supreme Court judgeship.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of R. E. Driscoll Sr
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 8:03 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Brett Kavanaugh Is Long Past His Sell-by Date
as a Credible Human
Miriam:
I wonder how many of judges critics could stand up under FBI background
investigations.
Richard
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 3, 2018, at 2:47 PM, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
to know about any of that. And so we don't.
Brett Kavanaugh Is Long Past His Sell-by Date as a Credible Human By
William Boardman, Reader Supported News
02 October 18
I have been speaking with a number of people on the other side. We've
had conversations ongoing for a while with regard to making sure that
we do due diligence here..
- Senator Jeff Flake, Arizona Republican, September 28, 2018
When Jeff Flake says he's been talking with people on the other side
about doing due diligence regarding the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court
nomination, that's the sound of hypocrisy talking. Flake's party
destroyed due diligence the moment it decided to keep most of the
records of Kavanaugh's government service secret. Think about that. It
doesn't seem the Democrats thought much about it. They made some token
complaints before rolling over and saying, in effect, that's OK, this
guy worked for the executive branch on polarizing, partisan issues for
years, but we don't really need to know what he did even though
taxpayers were paying him to do it. Seriously, whatever his
involvement with Vince Foster's suicide or the Starr investigation
into Monica Lewinsky or shutting down the vote count in the 2000
election or building a bogus case for an illegal war in Iraq or
developing justifications for torture and other war crimes, we don't need
risk to take. And then Dr.
A bipartisan conspiracy of silence was treated as a reasonable
approach to vetting a chronic liar whose known views would take this
country in the opposite direction from where a majority of the people
appear to want it to go. With that corrupt two-party bargain in place,
the risk of an actual, factual record for the candidate was too great a
Christine Blasey Ford finally emerged with a credible tale ofinvestigates.
Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, both drunk and laughing hysterically, trying
to rape her in an eerie enactment of a "devil's triangle" (which
Kavanaugh, with presumably unintended irony, would later testify
falsely was a "drinking game" - a game for the drinkers, perhaps, but
not so much the victim). This was one of the lesser dark areas of
Kavanaugh's case that persuaded Jeff Flake to play both sides of the
aisle to no clear purpose (continuing his September 28
statement):
And I think it would be proper to delay the floor vote for up to, but
not more than, one week in order to let the FBI continue-to do an
investigation, limited in time and scope, to the current allegations
that are there, and limited in time to no more than one week..
Acting as if he were proposing something brave, Flake suggested
postponing the floor vote, not the committee vote, a gesture that is
so antithetical to itself as to be a moral cypher. If there is reason
to postpone the floor vote, then there is at least as much reason to
postpone the committee. The committee vote by definition pre-judges
the floor vote. The committee vote maintains the nomination's
momentum, even as Flake pretends to pause for reflection while the FBI
risk of actual fairness, Flake concluded his statement:
But his proposal isn't a good faith postponement. Flake does not seek
a serious, credible FBI investigation that follows the facts wherever
they might lead. Acting in patent bad faith, he calls for an
investigation of limited time and scope, conditions that increase the
likelihood of an inadequate investigation. And Flake calls for an
investigation limited "to the current allegations," which is
tantamount to calling for a cover-up of any future allegations, or any
further allegations developing out of current allegations. Having
called for a process that could appear as fairness without significant
when Kavanaugh says in his opening statement under oath:
And I will vote to advance the bill to the floor with that understanding.
Flake's fellow Republicans professed to be shocked - shocked! - by his
resort to subterfuge while moving the Kavanaugh nomination forward.
Then they promptly went along with it. As did the president, with a
still secret order implementing it. Flake may have imagined himself as
the subject of a profile in courage, even though his action
accomplished nothing. It was a profile in cowardice cloaked in
hypocrisy. Little wonder this plan has been unraveling almost since it
was put in place. Actual courage would have led Flake to vote against
sending the nomination to the floor of the Senate until all
Kavanaugh's dishonesties, anger issues, and judicial temperament
questions had been satisfactorily answered. A relatively simple example,
hers.
Dr. Ford's allegation is not merely uncorroborated, it is refuted by
the very people she says were there, including by a longtime friend of
Refuted.claiming "refutation"
This is false. None of Dr. Ford's allegations were refuted by anyone. Dr.
Ford's allegations have not been effectively rebutted by anyone.
Kavanaugh has denied them. His supporters have said, in effect, I
can't imagine he'd do such a thing. But there is NO evidence that
counters Dr. Ford's allegations. And Kavanaugh knows that: right before
Kavanaugh himself acknowledged that "the very people she says were there"fact that Dr.
have all said they don't remember anything. Kavanaugh doesn't mention
that the "longtime friend" has said she believes Dr. Ford.
Why does this matter?
Any decent judge should know the difference between "refute" and "rebut,"
and should take care not to assert refutation where none exists. If
Kavanaugh is deliberately lying here, that should be disqualifying for
service on the Supreme Court, or any court. If Kavanaugh is not lying,
the dishonesty with which he presents and evaluates evidence should be
disqualifying for his holding any judgeship.
Kavanaugh made a point of saying he wrote his own opening statement,
with help from no one. He says he showed it to one former law clerk
(who apparently had nothing to say about the misuse of "refute").
Kavanaugh insisted that it was all his own work, as was this passage:
This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated
political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President
Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about
my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of
dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.
That's a pretty remarkable charge for a sitting judge to make without
offering any supporting evidence. The record suggests it's not
entirely true (at best), since Dr. Ford tried to come forward in July,
when Kavanaugh first appeared on the short list of possible nominees. The
Ford's name was not public until September 17 was not her doing, andSciences.
nothing in the record supports the notion that these events were "a
calculated and orchestrated political hit." Kavanaugh's statement here
smacks of raw, right-wing partisanship based not on fact but bias.
We do not want any more judges acting on bias rather than facts. We
should have the FBI investigate Kavanaugh's fervent claims. We should
begin by believing him. We should provide a public hearing in which he
may put forward any factual basis for his claim that he is the victim
of an attempted political rape by unnamed attackers.
Email This Page
William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio,
TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the
Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of
America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine,
and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work.
Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back
to Reader Supported News.
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
