All Things SCOTUS

ab2cmiller

Troublemaker in training
Messages
11,457
Reaction score
8,537
Tweet from yesterday, evidently Donnelly is now citing temperament as the reason for being opposed. At least according to his aide.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I’ve been asking whether <a href="https://twitter.com/SenDonnelly?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenDonnelly</a> could change his opposition to Kavanaugh since it hinged much on lack of FBI probe and now there is one. Here’s what a senior aide tells me this morning <a href="https://t.co/ZFldn5smpD">pic.twitter.com/ZFldn5smpD</a></p>— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) <a href="https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1047491209973981187?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 3, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,954
Reaction score
11,239
Tweet from yesterday, evidently Donnelly is now citing temperament as the reason for being opposed. At least according to his aide.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I’ve been asking whether <a href="https://twitter.com/SenDonnelly?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SenDonnelly</a> could change his opposition to Kavanaugh since it hinged much on lack of FBI probe and now there is one. Here’s what a senior aide tells me this morning <a href="https://t.co/ZFldn5smpD">pic.twitter.com/ZFldn5smpD</a></p>— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) <a href="https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1047491209973981187?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 3, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Comment section there is especially interesting...
 

drayer54

Well-known member
Messages
8,413
Reaction score
5,840
Procedural vote tomorrow, final vote Sunday. Basically would need two of the three Republican "swing votes" (Flake, Collins, Murkowski) to vote NO for him to not be confirmed.

Now imagine had the GOP not completely whiffed in Alabama last year.
 

ab2cmiller

Troublemaker in training
Messages
11,457
Reaction score
8,537
Can you imagine the fun Braun or some of the PAC's will have if he votes no, because of temperament?

It doesn't take much imagination to envision a commercial with Donnelly's own words. He was opposed to the nomination because McConnell wouldn't order an FBI investigation, only to change his reason after the FBI investigation was ordered. The very investigation Donnelly wanted.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Democrats need to stop moving the goal posts. <a href="https://t.co/VZ4wURuH1Z">pic.twitter.com/VZ4wURuH1Z</a></p>— Senate Republicans (@SenateGOP) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenateGOP/status/1047948318154936320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 4, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Effective.
 

loomis41973

Banned
Messages
4,055
Reaction score
203
Mexico Joe Donnelly is toast if he votes no and might be either way.

Time to ditch No show Joe.
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,954
Reaction score
11,239
Boof is and shall forever be the name of one of the absolute best 80s movie girlfriends...
 

Greenore

Well-known member
Messages
1,261
Reaction score
535
So, after reading several different news sites, twitter feeds and commentaries, would it be safe to say that EVERYONE hates the FBI now? What a time to be alive.

Cheers and Go Irish!!
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,954
Reaction score
11,239
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Democrats need to stop moving the goal posts. <a href="https://t.co/VZ4wURuH1Z">pic.twitter.com/VZ4wURuH1Z</a></p>— Senate Republicans (@SenateGOP) <a href="https://twitter.com/SenateGOP/status/1047948318154936320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 4, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Effective.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Kavanaugh was angry, vindictive, and hostile during his testimony about Dr. Blasey Ford’s allegations of attempted rape. We fully believe a man this belligerent and entitled is capable of sexual assault. <br><br>We <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BelieveSurvivors?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BelieveSurvivors</a>. <br>We have <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NoFaithInKavanaugh?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NoFaithInKavanaugh</a>.</p>— Women's March (@womensmarch) <a href="https://twitter.com/womensmarch/status/1047601580579667968?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 3, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Irish YJ

Southsida
Messages
25,888
Reaction score
1,444
So, after reading several different news sites, twitter feeds and commentaries, would it be safe to say that EVERYONE hates the FBI now? What a time to be alive.

Cheers and Go Irish!!

FBI, CIA, NSA..... all of them...
They all have way too much power along with DC in general.

That movie will never get old.... lol

Give me a keg of beer!!

have not seen that movie in ages.
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,954
Reaction score
11,239
have not seen that movie in ages.

I have seen it more times than i'd like to admit, it's one of those that if it's on I'll sit down and watch... def among my fav 80s flicks.
 

Sea Turtle

Slow and steady wins the race
Messages
5,645
Reaction score
3,488
You think the left is mad now? Wait until next spring when Clearance Thomas retires and Trump gets 3 justices in 3 years.

Amy Coney Barrett would look real good up there on that court.
 

NorthDakota

Grandson of Loomis
Messages
15,706
Reaction score
6,014
sure is entertaining.

Quinnipiac has white women from +14 dem in July to +1 now.

Marist had suburban white women +35 dem in SEPTEMBER. Only +14 by October 1st. After this shit i can imagine it dropping further.

This is wild af. Truly a great day. Keg fucking City!
 

Legacy

New member
Messages
7,871
Reaction score
321
The Senate Should Not Confirm Kavanaugh
Signed, 2,400+ Law Professors

The following letter will be presented to the United States Senate on Oct. 4.

Judicial temperament is one of the most important qualities of a judge. As the Congressional Research Service explains, a judge requires “a personality that is even-handed, unbiased, impartial, courteous yet firm, and dedicated to a process, not a result.” The concern for judicial temperament dates back to our founding; in Federalist 78, titled “Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” Alexander Hamilton expressed the need for “the integrity and moderation of the judiciary.”

We are law professors who teach, research and write about the judicial institutions of this country. Many of us appear in state and federal court, and our work means that we will continue to do so, including before the United States Supreme Court. We regret that we feel compelled to write to you, our Senators, to provide our views that at the Senate hearings on Sept. 27, Judge Brett Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land.

The question at issue was of course painful for anyone. But Judge Kavanaugh exhibited a lack of commitment to judicious inquiry. Instead of being open to the necessary search for accuracy, Judge Kavanaugh was repeatedly aggressive with questioners. Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh described the hearing as partisan, referring to it as “a calculated and orchestrated political hit,” rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to senators.

As you know, under two statutes governing bias and recusal, judges must step aside if they are at risk of being perceived as or of being unfair. As Congress has previously put it, a judge or justice “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” These statutes are part of a myriad of legal commitments to the impartiality of the judiciary, which is the cornerstone of the courts.

We have differing views about the other qualifications of Judge Kavanaugh. But we are united, as professors of law and scholars of judicial institutions, in believing that he did not display the impartiality and judicial temperament requisite to sit on the highest court of our land.

Signed, with institutional affiliation listed for identification purposes only, by the following:

Signatoriess followed. And,

Female Law Professors’ Letter to Senators re Kavanaugh Nomination


Dear Senators:

We are a non-partisan group of women law faculty from across the nation charged with training our students to become ethical lawyers and leaders of the bar. We believe in and embrace the Supreme Court and all that it represents – judicial independence, fair-mindedness, and justice and equality under the law. On a daily basis, we teach our students about the importance of the rule of law, impartiality on the part of judges in the United States’ legal system, and professionalism as a mandate for attorneys and judges.

Judicial professionalism is not an abstract ideal. At a minimum, judicial professionalism includes respecting and listening to parties who come before the bench, exercising honesty and integrity, and the ability to control one’s temper. The ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct and the Code of Conduct for United States Judges give guidance to judges on how to perform their duties with impartiality and integrity. These characteristics are the building blocks of a fair and just legal system. They were, however, absent from Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s opening statement and testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 28, 2018. We are deeply concerned that if Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed, he will fail to perform his duties in a manner befitting our highest Court. For these reasons, we urge you to vote against Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges requires that “[a] judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” Manifestations of bias or prejudice with respect to gender and political affiliation are inconsistent with Canon 2.

Judge Kavanaugh demonstrated disrespect towards Democratic senators vested with the constitutional authority to assess his ability to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. He continually interrupted, speaking in a tone that was inappropriate given the seriousness of the proceedings. His condescension was especially evident in his responses to the questions of women senators. One of the worst instances of such behavior was exhibited when Senator Amy Klobuchar asked the Judge whether his drinking meant that he could not remember events. He responded, “You’re asking about blackout. I don’t know, have you?”

Judge Kavanaugh’s lack of respect for our democratic institutions, and for women in positions of power in particular, revealed that he does not have the requisite judicial temperament. We would never allow our students to engage in such conduct even in mock proceedings or the classroom. If the venue for Judge Kavanaugh’s conduct had been a courtroom, a judge might have found him in contempt.

Many of us have participated on search committees for faculty members, deans, provosts, university presidents, and other positions. If job candidates refused to answer probative questions and side-stepped with stock answers about their pedigrees and accomplishments, their behavior would leave us with serious questions about their honesty and credibility.

We are not alone in our assessment of Judge Kavanaugh. Although the Judge has cited the ABA’s endorsement of his nomination in 2006, the ABA actually downgraded the Judge from well-qualified to simply qualified, in part, because of his temperament and concerns about his “ability to be balanced and fair.”

We doubt that Judge Kavanaugh can be impartial. In his lengthy opening remarks during the Senate hearing, he stated:

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.
For over two centuries, Supreme Court justices have set aside their political views to evaluate claims and render rulings that advance the rule of law and reflect changes in our society. Judge Kavanaugh’s pointed remarks suggest he does not have the capacity to give fair consideration to all cases.

We urge you to reject Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Judge Kavanaugh has shown that he is unable to respect women in positions of power, manifests bias with respect to gender and political affiliation, does not meet basic standards of professionalism, and lacks independence, impartiality, and judicial temperament.
 
Last edited:

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
There is no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez.
— Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judiciary-committee-releases-executive-summary-of-supplemental-fbi-report-on-kavanaugh

Published 3 hours agoLast Update 28 mins ago
Judiciary Committee releases executive summary of supplemental FBI report on Kavanaugh
By Gregg Re | Fox News

Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans released an executive summary of the FBI's confidential supplemental background investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh late Thursday, which key swing-vote senators vowed they would continue to review Friday ahead of a major vote on his confirmation.

According to the summary of the report, FBI agents interviewed 10 people and reached out to 11. They focused exclusively on witnesses with potential first-hand knowledge of alleged sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh.

"The FBI provided to the Senate 12 detailed FD-302 reports summarizing their interviews with the witnesses as well as supporting materials cited by the witnesses during their interviews," the summary reads. Only senators and top aides are being allowed to review the full report in a secure facility on Capitol Hill.

Notably absent from the witness list were any individuals directly related to the allegations of Julie Swetnick, who claimed in a sworn statement that she had witnessed Kavanaugh participating in systemic gang rapes decades ago.

Swetnick's credibility has taken a beating in recent days, with one ex-boyfriend telling Fox News she "exaggerated everything" and had threatened to kill his unborn child. Another ex-boyfriend similarly cast doubt on her credibility, as reports surfaced that she had previously been sued for allegedly concocting false sexual harassment claims. Swetnick is represented by anti-Trump lawyer Michael Avenatti.

Among those questioned were Mark Judge, PJ Smyth, and Leland Keyser, the three individuals Christine Blasey Ford claimed were present when Kavanaugh allegedly threw her on a bed and sexually assaulted her sometime in the 1980s (Ford has variously claimed the episode occurred in the mid-1980s and early 1980s, before testifying that it occurred in 1982).

"There is no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez."

— Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans

All three of those individuals had already provided statements to the Judiciary Committee under penalty of felony denying any knowledge of the alleged assault. Keyser, Ford's lifelong best friend, denied ever knowing Kavanaugh. When questioned about Keyser's statement at last Thursday's hearing, Ford suggested Keyser was having serious medical issues and had apologized for her denial.

Judge was also questioned "extensively" about other allegations besides Ford's, according to the Judiciary Committee. Democrats had called for Senate Republicans to subpoena Judge, a longtime friend of Kavanaugh's, so that they could question him about the nominee's drinking habits and high school yearbook references.

Additionally, the FBI interviewed two individuals named in Kavanaugh's July 1, 1982 calendar entry, which some observers said could have described the gathering where Ford was purportedly attacked. Those individuals were his longtime friend Christopher Garrett and Timothy Gaudette, whose house Kavanaugh visited for beers on July 1, according to his calendar. An attorney for one of those witnesses was also interviewed.

Kavanaugh op-ed: I am an independent, impartial judgeVideo
Finally, the FBI interviewed Deborah Ramirez, the woman who claimed in an explosive New Yorker piece that Kavanaugh had exposed himself to her at a Yale party. The FBI also interviewed two alleged eyewitnesses identified by Ramirez, and tried to interview a third, but that individual refused to cooperate. Agents also interviewed one of Ramirez's close friends from college.

"The Supplemental Background Investigation confirms what the Senate Judiciary Committee concluded after its investigation: there is no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez," the Judiciary Committee Republicans wrote.

Ramirez had previously acknowledged to The New Yorker that, as recently as last month, she was not sure Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself to her. She then changed her mind after speaking to an attorney for less than a week, according ot the magazine. Kavanaugh testified last Thursday that he had heard Ramirez was asking former classmates at Yale about the alleged episode during the summer, apparently trying to "refresh" their memories in a manner he implied was inappropriate.

One of Ramirez's lawyers complained on Twitter this week that the FBI did not appear to be conducting a "serious" investigation because, he claimed, the agency failed to reach out to some of the dozens of witnesses he had suggested.

For several hours, senators from both parties filed in and out of the Capitol Building's Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), where they pored over the FBI's full report in a private, secured setting. Senators were not allowed to take the report out of the SCIF.


Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
This is now the 7th. time the FBI has investigated Judge Kavanaugh. If we made it 100, it would still not be good enough for the Obstructionist Democrats.​
9:17 AM - Oct 4, 2018

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, considered a key potential swing vote on Kavanaugh, said Thursday that the bureau’s supplemental background probe “appears to be a very thorough investigation.” On Thursday afternoon, however, she remained in the SCIF for more than an hour and a half, causing some consternation among Republicans.

“All of that time, she still doesn’t know?” one source asked Fox News.

And Arizona Republican Sen. Flake, who originally requested the FBI re-open its investigation into the sexual assault claims leveled against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford, agreed with Collins' assessment.

“No new corroborative information came out of it,” Flake said. “Thus far, we’ve seen no new credible corroboration — no new corroboration at all.”

However, Flake continued to keep the public guessing, returning to view the report again and saying he has "more reading" to do. He pulled a surprise last week when he publicly backed Kavanaugh, then demanded the FBI probe before a final vote.

Top Democrats, though, minced no words about the FBI's report, saying the bureau's inquiry should not have been restricted to one week. President Trump has said the FBI had the authority to interview "whoever" they wanted, but Democrats also alleged that the administration had meddled in the investigation.

"Well, that report -- if that's an investigation, it's a bull---- investigation," Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., told a man as he walked through the Capitol complex on Thursday. "The reality is, that was not a full and thorough investigation."



Senator Bob Menendez

@SenatorMenendez
Just read the FBI report on Kavanaugh - if that’s an investigation, it’s a bullshit investigation.
2:02 PM - Oct 4, 2018​

The investigation's one-week time limit, Flake and other Republicans said, was necessary to avoid bogging down Kavanaugh's nomination with a never-ending probe into various uncorroborated, lurid accusations, which all related to alleged events more than three decades ago. President Trump has said that the FBI had the authority to interview "whoever" it wanted, but he openly cast doubt this week on the legitimacy of many claims against Kavanaugh.

Ford's attorneys also sharply criticized the FBI for not reaching out to interview their client, who testified at length during Thursday's hearing. They told Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, that they would only turn over Ford's therapist notes if the FBI interviewed their client.

Ford has extensively cited her 2012 therapy notes as a kind of corroboration for her claims but has not provided them -- even in part -- to investigators. (The Washington Post said Ford had shared a "portion" of her notes with their reporters, but under oath on Thursday, Ford said she could not recall whether she had actually done so, or merely described the notes).

Late Thursday, Grassley ripped into Ford's attorneys for their request, and suggested in an exasperated letter that they simply wanted to stall Kavanaugh's confirmation at any cost.

"Your response on behalf of your client is a non-sequitur," Grassley wrote in the letter. "It’s not even clear to me what purpose turning over these materials to the FBI would accomplish. The FBI would simply turn over that evidence to the Senate. That is precisely the outcome I seek with this request."

Furthermore, Grassley added, "The U.S. Senate doesn’t control the FBI. If you have an objection to how the FBI conducts its investigations, take it up with [FBI] Director [Christopher] Wray."

Grassley concluded by implying that Ford's attorneys weren't disclosing her therapist notes because they did not, in fact, back up her claims.

A final vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation is expected Saturday. A key procedural vote to end debate on his nomination is set for Friday morning.
 
Top