Friday, October 5, 2018

Trump was right - the FBI investigation was rigged - by him

You should create a folder on your desktop and save a link to this summary from AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona, A ‘rigged’ FBI investigation in the Kavanaugh coverup (Updated). It will come in handy as a reminder when Dems take the House.

The Blue Meanie sketches possible outcomes of a KKK event - a Kavanaugh Konfirmation Koverup.

This morning, 7:30 AM local time, the Senate is scheduled to vote on cloture. If it passes, it will open the way to a vote on the Kavanaugh nomination as early as this weekend.

Senators Flake and Collins are already on record saying that, because the FBI uncovered no corroborating evidence in the reopened background check, they will vote for confirmation. I called Flake’s office last night and told him (err, told the answering machine) that he’d been “rolled”. Here’s why I think that. When Flake proposed a pause in the confirmation proceedings, he asked for a renewed FBI investigation limited in “time and scope.” On the surface, that seemed a reasonable compromise. It would assure a vote at time certain, and it would be limited to those allegations and witnesses known at the time. Those knowing the capabilities and habits of the FBI assured the nation that the short time proposed, a week, was not a problem. However, from the start the “scope” and who defined it were not specified. The president eventually claimed that the FBI could interview whoever the bureau thought relevant, but the White House staff, Don McGahn, a friend of Kavanagh’s, appears to have imposed limits, particularly confining the interviews to nine individuals, a group that did not include the principals, Ford and Kavanaugh. So, of course the FBI turned up no corroborating evidence because it could not have done so given the White House’s interference.

Consider what now is stacked up against confirmation summarized in these snippets from the Blue Meanie post.

All the witnesses NOT interviewed

More than 40 people with potential information into the sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh have not been contacted by the FBI, according to multiple sources that include friends of both the nominee and his accusers.

More than 20 individuals who know either Kavanaugh or Ramirez, who has accused the nominee of exposing himself to her while the two attended Yale University, have not heard from the FBI despite attempts to contact investigators, including Kavanaugh’s roommate at the time and a former close Ramirez friend.

Some of those individuals not interviewed by the FBI were very close to Kavanaugh during time of the alleged sexual attack against Ford. Blue Meanie links to the Talking Points Memo report, Kavanaugh’s Yale Suitemate Joins Chorus Of Witnesses Stonewalled By FBI.

Kavanaugh “misled” the Senate

… there may be compelling evidence Kavanaugh did what he was accused of and then misled the Senate. [In fact, he did mislead the Senate. Demand Justice documents Kavanaugh: 31 Lies and Counting. The Huffington Post lso has a summary of All The Lies Brett Kavanaugh Told.] …

Doyle McManus (LA Times reprinted in the Daily Star) writes Kavanaugh may or may not have committed sexual assault. He definitely lied.

Did Kavanaugh assault Christine Blasey Ford? The Senate and the public will almost surely be stymied by an epistemological problem: It will be impossible to know what happened. As believable as Ford was, her testimony has too many gaps. In Flake’s words, there will always be doubt.

But on the question of Kavanaugh’s truthfulness? There is much less doubt.

That leaves the Senate with a final question. Will a nominee for the Supreme Court be held to a lower standard of honesty than an ordinary job candidate? That one shouldn’t be hard to answer.

Kavanaugh’s temper and biases on display in the hearing are disqualifying

More than 1,200 law professors have signed onto a letter saying that Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial restraint at a Senate hearing last week — behavior that would be disqualifying for any court nominee.

At the hearing, Kavanaugh vehemently defended his innocence and derided what he called “a calculated and orchestrated political hit.”

Afterward, law professors across the country began discussing “with great distress, the unprecedented and unfathomable demeanor of Judge Kavanaugh,” said Bernard Harcourt, a professor at Columbia Law School.

The letter, which will be sent to the U.S. Senate, grew out of those conversations. “It was a spontaneous reaction to the hearing,” Harcourt said.

Signatories included Martha Minow — the former dean of Harvard Law School, where Kavanaugh taught a popular course — and some scholars who previously supported Kavanaugh.

Harcourt said they signed out of concern about a rush to judgment, in the belief that for the Senate to elevate Kavanaugh “without full information and deliberation to the Supreme Court would undermine the respect owed” to the institution.

The letter to the Senate cites two laws governing bias and recusal, noting, “Judges must step aside if they are at risk of being perceived as or of being unfair . ..

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

Former Supreme Court Justice opposes confirmation

You can add retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens to the list.

AZBlueMeanie summarizes what may come of a positive vote on confirmation, among which is the possibility that a Democratic House will take action against Kavanaugh, confirmed or not.

We are witness to McConnell’s exercise of raw power in ramming through this nomination. However, don’t ever, ever forget that McConnell denied another sitting president his right to a confirmation hearing with over a year left in his term.

No comments:

Post a Comment