[FULL OP-ED ON EXTENDED ARTICLE]
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged Thursday he “might have been too emotional” when testifying against allegations as he made a final bid to win over wavering GOP senators on the eve of a crucial vote to advance his confirmation.
Three GOP senators and one Democrat remain undecided about elevating Kavanaugh to the high court. Two of the Republicans signaled Thursday that they were satisfied with the findings of a confidential new FBI report into the assault allegations, boosting the hopes of GOP leaders.
President Donald Trump rallied behind Kavanaugh during a campaign event in Minnesota Thursday night, telling supporters that the “rage-fueled resistance” to his nominee “is starting to backfire at a level nobody has ever seen before.”
Still, Kavanaugh’s op-ed underscored that his performance at a Senate hearing last week opened new questions about his impartiality and judicial temperament. Democrats say Kavanaugh’s assertion that left-wing groups seeking “revenge on behalf of the Clintons” were behind the misconduct allegations suggests he would rule from the bench with a partisan bent.
In an op-ed Thursday in The Wall Street Journal, Kavanaugh said there were “a few things I should not have said” during the hearing.
“Going forward, you can count on me to be the same kind of judge and person I have been for my entire 28-year legal career: hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good,” he wrote.
Of note, the op-ed made no mention metion of Kavanaugh’s chief accuser Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, nor of the FBI investigation.
Senate leaders set a pivotal preliminary vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination for 10:30 a.m. Friday. If that succeeds, a final roll call was expected Saturday as the long, emotional battle over the conservative jurist drew toward its climax.
Six days after Trump reluctantly ordered the FBI to scrutinize the accusations— which allegedly occurred in the 1980s and Kavanaugh has denied — leading GOP lawmakers briefed on the agency’s confidential document all reached the same conclusion: There was no verification of the women’s past claims and nothing new.
Democrats complained that the investigation was shoddy, omitting interviews with numerous potential witnesses, and accused the White House of limiting the FBI’s leeway. Those not interviewed in the reopened background investigation included Kavanaugh himself and Christine Blasey Ford, who ignited the furor by alleging he’d molested her in a locked room at a 1982 high school gathering.
A week after a televised Senate Judiciary Committee hearing at which Kavanaugh and Ford transfixed the nation, the Capitol campus remained a stew of tension as the election-season cliff-hanger neared its conclusion. A hefty police presence added an air of anxiety, as did thousands of noisy anti-Kavanaugh demonstrators who gathered outside the Supreme Court and in Senate office buildings. U.S. Capitol Police said 302 were arrested — among them comedian Amy Schumer, a distant relative of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.
“What we know for sure is the FBI report did not corroborate any of the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters about the document, which was sent to Congress overnight. On the Senate floor, he witheringly called the accusations “uncorroborated mud.”
Earlier, Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, one of the publicly undecided Republicans, told reporters “we’ve seen no additional corroborating information” about the claims against the 53-year-old conservative jurist and said the investigation had been comprehensive.
A second undeclared Republican, Susan Collins of Maine, also expressed satisfaction with the probe, calling it “a very thorough investigation.” She paid two visits to the off-limits room where the document was being displayed to lawmakers. She told reporters she would not announce her position until Friday.
Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, said she was “still reviewing” her decision.
While GOP leaders were not saying they’d nailed down the support needed, backing from two of those three would ensure Kavanaugh’s confirmation because every other Republican was poised to back him. Republicans have a narrow 51-49 Senate majority, and Vice President Mike Pence will be available to cast a tie-breaking vote.
The trio of GOP moderates, leery of three women’s claims of alcohol-fueled misconduct by Kavanaugh, had refused to let his nomination proceed last week until Trump ordered the FBI probe. The three were briefed together on the investigation in the secure room senators were using to view the report. They skirted reporters for much of the day, sometimes shielded by Capitol Police.
Underscoring the hardening partisan lines, one of the two undecided Democratic senators said she’d oppose Kavanaugh. North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, who faces a difficult re-election race next month, cited concerns about his “past conduct” and said she felt his heated attacks on Democrats during last week’s Judiciary Committee hearing raised questions about his “current temperament, honesty and impartiality.”
West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, the other undeclared Democrat, spent time looking at the report and said he would resume reading it Friday.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, said while her party had agreed to a week-long FBI probe with a finite scope, “We did not agree that the White House should tie the FBI’s hands.”
Democrats also objected to a statement by committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who said the investigation “found no hint of misconduct.” The Judiciary panel’s 10 Democrats said in a statement that based on their briefing and study of the document, “That is not true.”
Grassley also said the FBI could not “locate any third parties who can attest to any of the allegations,” and he said there is “no contemporaneous evidence.”
Neither side specified what they were referring to. Under rules Congress and the White House have used for years, FBI background checks are considered confidential, and lawmakers and aides are not supposed to reveal details.
White House spokesman Raj Shah rebuffed Democrats’ complaints, saying, “What critics want is a never-ending fishing expedition into high school drinking.” He said the FBI reached out to 10 people and interviewed nine, including “several individuals at the request of the Senate, and had a series of follow-up interviews … following certain leads.”
Senators said the documents they examined totaled about 50 pages. Some said there were notes on interviews with nine people, though others said 10.
Trump, who Tuesday scornfully mocked Ford’s Judiciary panel testimony, tweeted that Kavanaugh’s “great life cannot be ruined by mean” and “despicable Democrats and totally uncorroborated allegations!”
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said five of the witnesses involved Ford’s claims and four were related to Deborah Ramirez, who has asserted that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her when both were Yale freshmen.
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said senators would sit around a rectangular table reading different sections of the report while a committee aide read other parts aloud. Senators were allowed to take notes but not remove them from the room, he said. The chamber, in the Capitol Visitor Center adjacent to the Capitol, is also used for secret intelligence briefings. Some lawmakers said they’d not been able to schedule time in the room until Friday.
Corker said nine of the pages were about Mark Judge, the Kavanaugh friend who Ford said also jumped on her while Kavanaugh assaulted her. Judge has said he doesn’t recall the incident.
While the FBI interviews were to focus on sexual assault allegations, Democrats have also questioned Kavanaugh’s drinking habits during high school and college and dishonest comments they say he has made about his background. Kavanaugh has said stories of his bad behavior while drinking are exaggerated.
Barring leaks, it was unclear how much if any of the FBI report would be made public.
[RELATED – Who Was Questioned By The FBI In The Kavanaugh Probe?]
The following op-ed was written by Judge Kavanaugh and first published on Thursday by the Wall Street Journal:
I was deeply honored to stand at the White House July 9 with my wife, Ashley, and my daughters, Margaret and Liza, to accept President Trump’s nomination to succeed my former boss and mentor, Justice Anthony Kennedy, on the Supreme Court. My mom, Martha—one of the first women to serve as a Maryland prosecutor and trial judge, and my inspiration to become a lawyer—sat in the audience with my dad, Ed.
That night, I told the American people who I am and what I believe. I talked about my 28-year career as a lawyer, almost all of which has been in public service. I talked about my 12 years as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, often called the second most important court in the country, and my five years of service in the White House for President George W. Bush. I talked about my long record of advancing and promoting women, including as a judge—a majority of my 48 law clerks have been women—and as a longtime coach of girls’ basketball teams.
As I explained that night, a good judge must be an umpire—a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no political party, litigant or policy. As Justice Kennedy has stated, judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because the law and the Constitution compel the result. Over the past 12 years, I have ruled sometimes for the prosecution and sometimes for criminal defendants, sometimes for workers and sometimes for businesses, sometimes for environmentalists and sometimes for coal miners. In each case, I have followed the law. I do not decide cases based on personal or policy preferences. I am not a pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant judge. I am not a pro-prosecution or pro-defense judge. I am a pro-law judge.
deciding cases according to the Constitution and laws of the United States. I would always strive to be a team player.
During the confirmation process, I met with 65 senators and explained my approach to the law. I participated in more than 30 hours of hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I submitted written answers to nearly 1,300 additional questions. I was grateful for the opportunity.
After all those meetings and after my initial hearing concluded, I was subjected to wrongful and sometimes vicious allegations. My time in high school and college, more than 30 years ago, has been ridiculously distorted. My wife and daughters have faced vile and violent threats.
Against that backdrop, I testified before the Judiciary Committee last Thursday to defend my family, my good name and my lifetime of public service. My hearing testimony was forceful and passionate. That is because I forcefully and passionately denied the allegation against me. At times, my testimony—both in my opening statement and in response to questions—reflected my overwhelming frustration at being wrongly accused, without corroboration, of horrible conduct completely contrary to my record and character. My statement and answers also reflected my deep distress at the unfairness of how this allegation has been handled.
I was very emotional last Thursday, more so than I have ever been. I might have been too emotional at times. I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said. I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.
Going forward, you can count on me to be the same kind of judge and person I have been for my entire 28-year legal career: hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good. As a judge, I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect. I have been known for my courtesy on and off the bench. I have not changed. I will continue to be the same kind of judge I have been for the last 12 years. And I will continue to contribute to our country as a coach, volunteer, and teacher. Every day I will try to be the best husband, dad, and friend I can be. I will remain optimistic, on the sunrise side of the mountain. I will continue to see the day that is coming, not the day that is gone.
I revere the Constitution. I believe that an independent and impartial judiciary is essential to our constitutional republic. If confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep an open mind in every case and always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the American rule of law.
Judge Kavanaugh has been nominated as an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
(AP / YWN)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
3 Responses
Do the American people want a highly qualified legal mind, who is also a good human being, as nothing to the contrary has been established, as their next Supreme Court Justice or a Democratic party automaton? That is the simple question.
Too late sir, we’ve seen you in anger.
אדם ניכר בכיסו בכוסו ובכעסו
Ya and what exactly did he do wrong even here was angry Rif?
But that was very cute.