SEPTEMBER 29, 2018

NEWS AND VIEWS

“... AN UGLY, SURREAL DAY WHEN PRIVILEGE MET ACCOUNTABILITY....”

THE REPUBLICANS HAVE SURELY PICKED A WINNER HERE, RIGHT? THIS IS A GREAT ARTICLE, AS ARE MOST OF THEM BY COMMON DREAMS. LOOK AT THE PHOTO CALLED: The How-Dare-You Guy. Getty Photo. ANYONE OF HEALTHY GOOD WILL TOWARD MANKIND WILL BE IMPRESSED BY WHAT THEY SAW AT THIS HEARING, AS ONE OF THE CHILLING SIDES TO AMERICAN DEMOCRACY. THE PROBLEM WITH DEMOCRACY IS HOW A GROUP OF PEOPLE CAN SEIZE THE REINS OF POWER NO MATTER HOW EVIL THEY ARE WILLING TO BE. I AM REFERRING TO A CORE GROUP – THOUGH AN UNCOMFORTABLY LARGE ONE – WHO ARE WRINGING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DRY OF ITS EMPATHETIC PEOPLE. I CAN’T HELP WONDERING WHY JEFF FLAKE IS LEAVING THE PARTY, AND WHAT HE WILL DO NEXT. PRETTY SOON THEY WILL HANG A SIGN OVER THEIR DOOR SAYING “WHOLE HUMAN BEINGS NOT WELCOME HERE.”

https://www.commondreams.org/further/2018/09/27/reaping-lunatic-whirlwind
Thursday, September 27, 2018
Reaping the Lunatic Whirlwind
byAbby Zimet, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH -- Outside the hearing: What was being criminalized. Twitter photo.

From the drama of the hearing - Dr. Christine Ford's steadfast calm, Frat Boy Kavanaugh's unglued, partisan, bullying, entitled male rage, the deranged shrieks of a handful of vile GOP relics - have come scraps of news. In an unprecedented step, the American Bar Association, whose once-unanimous, "well-qualified" rating Kavanaugh touted during one of his hissy fits, has rescinded their endorsement, arguing the proceedings should be halted until the FBI investigates. America Magazine, a major Catholic Jesuit publication, has called for Kavanaugh's nomination to be withdrawn. And Tennessee's Bob Corker, after witnessing that hysterical, self-righteous, obfuscating, mansplaining performance by a guy clearly too unstable to manage a Cinnabon, never mind sit on the Supreme Court, inconceivably said he's voting yes. For many of us, what lingers are the striking visuals of an ugly, surreal day when privilege met accountability and was some pissed, but America proved likely too broken to do right.

"Otherwise what you see is what you get. If this angry, aggressively maudlin guy accused of multiple sexual assaults can’t just adjudicate everything for ever, then what was even the point of the last 27 years? Who are we? Where is the justice? What was … How can … When is America?" - testimony from incoherent, alcoholic, self-pitying sexual predator and future Supreme Court Justice (sic) Brett Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh's women. Getty Image
Dr. Ford. Photo by Melina Mara/Pool/Reuters
The How-Dare-You Guy. Getty Photo
The wonders of the Internet, creator unknown:
VIDEO OF KAVANAUGH WITNESSING


THERE IS NO PRINT ARTICLE WITH THESE PHOTOS.
https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/photos/2018/09/28/photos-kavanaugh-hearing-sparks-emotional-protests-on-capitol-hill
Kavanaugh Hearing Sparks Emotional Protests
Hundreds of protesters rally as Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford's testimony take place.
By Lydia Chebbine and Brett Ziegler Sept. 28, 2018, at 8:39 a.m.

21 PHOTOS -- Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Hundreds of demonstrators gather on Capitol Hill to protest against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh and in support of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault, as she testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee.(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Hundreds of demonstrators gather on Capitol Hill to protest against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh and in support of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault, as she testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Protesters rally against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh inside the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Protesters and supporters of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh watch Christine Blasey Ford's testimony from inside Sen. Chuck Grassley's office.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Protesters support each other during demonstrations inside the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
(LYDIA CHEBBINE FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Valerie Ross of Brooklyn, New York participates in a chant with other demonstrators protesting against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh outside of the U.S. Supreme Court.
(LYDIA CHEBBINE FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | An activist prepares a sign on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court.
(LYDIA CHEBBINE FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | The scene outside the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | A demonstrator supporting Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh attends a rally near the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | An activist leads a chant as demonstrators make their way into the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Demonstrators fill an elevator at the Dirkson Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
(LYDIA CHEBBINE FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Activists supporting Dr. Christine Blasey Ford listen to her testimony on Capitol Hill.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Activists rally through the streets on Capitol Hill.
(LYDIA CHEBBINE FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Protesters march towards the U.S. Capitol.
(LYDIA CHEBBINE FOR USN&WR)

Sept. 27, 2018 | Washington, D.C. | Activists watch Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's testimony inside the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill.
(BRETT ZIEGLER FOR USN&WR) YOUNG WOMAN HAS PAINTED ON THE BACK OF HER SHIRT, “NOVEMBER IS COMING.”



SANDERS’ LETTER TO CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY IS THE FIRST ENUMERATION I’VE SEEN OF WHAT SPECIFIC THINGS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE UNTRUE IN KAVANAUGH’S ALLEGED LYING IN PRIOR YEARS. I ASSUME BERNIE SANDERS OR OTHERS CAN PROVE WHAT IS TRUE. GENERAL STATEMENTS ARE GOOD, TOO, BUT I REALLY WANT SPECIFICS TO HELP ME MAKE UP MY MIND ON THINGS. ONE OF THE THINGS I REALLY LIKE ABOUT SANDERS IS THAT HE IS PRACTICAL. I JUST HOPE THAT THE FBI WILL BE EMPOWERED TO LOOK AT THOSE THINGS; OR WILL THE GREAT COVERUP MACHINE LIE TO THE PEOPLE AGAIN?

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/09/29/lying-congress-federal-crime-sanders-demands-fbi-investigate-whether-kavanaugh
Published on
Saturday, September 29, 2018
byCommon Dreams
'Lying to Congress Is a Federal Crime': Sanders Demands FBI Investigate Whether Kavanaugh Committed Perjury
"This goes to the very heart of whether he should be confirmed to the court," the Vermont senator wrote in a letter on Saturday
byJake Johnson, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH -- Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks during a Federal Spending Oversight And Emergency Management Subcommittee hearing June 6, 2018 on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Aaron P. Bernstein/Getty Images)

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on Saturday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) demanded that the newly reopened FBI investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh examine both the serious accusations of sexual assault against him and whether he lied to Congress in his testimony.

"If a thorough investigation takes longer than a week, so be it. First and foremost, we need the truth."
—Sen. Bernie Sanders
"In order for this FBI investigation regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to be complete," Sanders wrote, "it is imperative the bureau must not only look into the accusations made by Dr. Ford, Deborah Ramirez, and Julie Swetnick, it should also examine the veracity of his testimony before the Judiciary Committee."

The Vermont senator went on to call on the Senate to not "constrain" the FBI probe to one week, arguing that a truly thorough probe could take longer.

"If you are concerned with a delay in this confirmation process, remember that Senate Republicans refused to allow the Senate to consider Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year," Sanders wrote. "In addition to investigating the accusations made by multiple women, a thorough investigation should include a review of Judge Kavanaugh’s numerous untruthful statements in his previous testimony before Congress."

Even prior to the emergence of credible sexual assault allegations against him, Kavanaugh—who on Thursday repeatedly refused to endorse an FBI probe into the allegations against him—was accused by several Democratic senators of lying to the Senate during hearings for his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals in 2004 and 2006.

In his letter to Grassley on Saturday, Sanders listed some of these examples, as well as statements Kavanaugh made "under oath regarding his treatment of women and his use of alcohol," which "appear not to be true."

Read Sanders' full letter:

Dear Chairman Grassley,

In order for this FBI investigation regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to be complete, it is imperative the bureau must not only look into the accusations made by Dr. Ford, Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, it should also examine the veracity of his testimony before the Judiciary Committee.

The Senate should not constrain the FBI to one week and must allow time for a full investigation. I would request that you inform the FBI that you will not consider their work complete until they examine the truthfulness of Judge Kavanaugh’s statements under oath while testifying before the Senate throughout his career, given the very serious fact that lying to Congress is a federal crime.

If you are concerned with a delay in this confirmation process, remember that Senate Republicans refused to allow the Senate to consider Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year.

In addition to investigating the accusations made by multiple women, a thorough investigation should include a review of Judge Kavanaugh’s numerous untruthful statements in his previous testimony before Congress. Specifically:

In his previous testimony before Congress, Judge Kavanaugh was asked more than 100 times if he knew about files stolen by Republican staffers from Judiciary Committee Democrats. He said he knew nothing. Emails released as part of these hearings show that these files were regularly shared with Kavanaugh while he was on the White House staff. One of the emails had the subject line “spying.” Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

In 2006 Judge Kavanaugh told Congress he did not know anything about the NSA warrantless wiretapping program prior to it being reported by the New York Times. This year an email revealed that while at the White House he might have been involved in some conversations about this program. Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

In 2004 Judge Kavanaugh testified the nomination of William Pryor to the 11th Circuit “was not one that I worked on personally.” Documents now contradict that statement. Newly released documents also call into question whether Judge Kavanaugh was truthful that the nomination of Charles Pickering “was not one of the judicial nominees that I was primarily handling.” Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

In 2006 Judge Kavanaugh testified, “I was not involved and am not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants.” New evidence released as part of these confirmation hearing contradicts that assertion. Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

Kavanaugh testified before the committee that he did not believe polygraphs were reliable. In 2016 he wrote, “As the Government notes, law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants. Those agencies also use polygraphs to ‘screen applicants for security clearances so that they may be deemed suitable for work in critical law enforcement, defense, and intelligence collection roles.’ . . . The Government has satisfactorily explained how polygraph examinations serve law enforcement purposes.” (Sack v. United States Department of Defense, 823 F.3d 687 (2016)) What changed his opinion or was he misleading the committee as to his beliefs about the reliability of polygraph tests?

Additionally, several statements made by Judge Kavanaugh under oath regarding his treatment of women and his use of alcohol appear not to be true. The scope of the FBI’s investigation must include investigating the following statements:

Judge Kavanaugh repeatedly told the committee he never drank to the point where he didn’t remember something. He also denied ever becoming aggressive when he drinks. However there have been many reports from those Judge Kavanaugh attended high school, college and law school with that contradict this assertion. Was he being truthful with the committee?

Judge Kavanaugh testified he treated women “as friends and equals” and “with dignity and respect.” Numerous entries in his school yearbook would seem to contradict this. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s statement to the committee truthful?

Judge Kavanaugh claimed that he and Dr. Ford “did not travel in the same social circles.” Dr. Ford said she dated Chris Garrett, referenced as a friend in his yearbook. In fact she testified Garrett introduced her to Kavanaugh. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s statement to the committee truthful?

Kavanaugh claimed he did not drink on weeknights but an entry on his calendar for Thursday July 1 states, “Go to Timmy’s for Skis w/ Judge, Tom, Pj, Bernie, Squi.” Kavanaugh clarified to Sen. Booker that “Skis” referred to beer. Was his original statement to the committee truthful?

A fundamental question the FBI can help answer is whether Judge Kavanaugh has been truthful with the committee. This goes to the very heart of whether he should be confirmed to the court. If a thorough investigation takes longer than a week, so be it. First and foremost, we need the truth.

Sincerely,

Bernard Sanders


WHAT I WANT TO KNOW FROM THE FBI IS WHETHER THERE ARE OTHER MISDEEDS OUT THERE TO BE FOUND – ARE THERE POLICE REPORTS? THE WAY HE DRANK I WOULD EXPECT SOME. CAR ACCIDENTS OR TRAFFIC CITATIONS? WHO ELSE DID HE SHOVE UP AGAINST A WALL? IS THERE A PSYCHIATRIC REPORT? WITH ALL THAT DRINKING, WOULD HE HAVE HAD TO PAY A BLACKMAILER ALONG THE WAY? DID THE REPUBLICAN SENATE ACTIVELY AND KNOWINGLY COVER UP SOME COMPROMISING INFORMATION WHICH THEY THEMSELVES FOUND ON HIM? WHAT ABOUT THOSE 9/10THS OF HIS PERSONAL FILE THAT THE REPUBLICANS NEVER TURNED OVER TO THE DEMS? I WONDER WHAT’S IN THOSE PAGES? THEY SEEM TO THINK THAT THEY HAVE ONLY ONE HORSE, AND THEY HAVE TO RUN HIM, EVEN THOUGH HE IS INJURED.

THE WAY THE REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN ACTING CLOSELY RESEMBLES FEAR TO ME, NOT BECAUSE OF THE CURRENTLY SEATED DEMOCRATS’ “DIRTY TRICKS,” BUT BECAUSE OF THE TRUTH. EVEN THEY WILL HAVE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC TRUST IF THEY ARE TO WIN AGAIN, AND I THINK THEY ARE VERY MUCH AWARE OF THAT. THAT FACTOR, PITTED AGAINST THEIR RUSH TO GET HIM SEATED ON THE COURT BEFORE THE DEMOCRATS (HOPEFULLY) TAKE OVER CONGRESS, IS CAUSING THEM TO SEEM TO BE THE BULLIES THAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE, RATHER THAN THE SMOOTH, RELIGIOUS, HIGHLY PLACED PEOPLE THAT THEY ENDEAVOR TO SEEM TO BE.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/what-will-fbi-investigation-kavanaugh-entail-n914966
What will FBI investigation into Kavanaugh sex-assault allegations entail?
"Remember, they're not reaching a decision or recommendation. They are just compiling the investigation and reporting on it."
by Ken Dilanian, Kristen Welker and Rich Schapiro / Sep.28.2018 / 9:32 PM EDT

President Trump on Friday ordered the FBI to investigate Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault accusation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh — but what does that mean, exactly?

Trump said the probe "must be limited in scope and completed in less than one week."

FBI agents will almost certainly interview Kavanaugh, Ford and other potential witnesses to the alleged attack.

The setting for these interviews will be far different than Thursday's extraordinary hearing on Capitol Hill where Ford and Kavanaugh answered questions before a panel of senators.

Trained interrogators will grill their subjects in private, with the threat of federal charges looming for anyone who might lie to an FBI agent.

The scope of the investigation, however, remains unclear.

Will the FBI look to interview other people beyond the ones Ford identified as having attended the high school gathering where the alleged assault took place in the early 1980?

Will the investigation also include the allegations leveled against Kavanaugh by other women, including Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick?

The answers to those questions will likely come from FBI Director Christopher Wray or White House Counsel Don McGahn.

PHOTOGRAPH -- President Donald Trump sits with FBI Director Christopher Wray during the FBI National Academy graduation ceremony in Quantico, Va on Dec. 15, 2017.Evan Vucci / AP file

Dr. Blasey Ford welcomes FBI investigation, calls it 'critical'
SEP.28.201809:11

Reached late Friday, the FBI referred questions to the White House. The White House declined to answer specific inquiries.

Such a probe is not unprecedented.

The FBI reopened its background investigation of then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas in 1991 after the allegations from Anita Hill came to light.

The investigation lasted three days. Former Vice President Joe Biden, who presided over the hearings, said the committee could not rely on the FBI report because it was "inconclusive" — a point that several Republican senators re-emphasized on Thursday.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley echoed a quote from Biden after several Democratic senators asked Kavanaugh to commit to an FBI probe.

Recommended -- Nightly News Full Broadcast (September 27th)

An angry, emotional Kavanaugh accuses Democrats of 'search and destroy'
"The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything obviously doesn’t understand anything. The FBI explicitly does not in this or any other case reach a conclusion. Period," Grassley said.

After Trump called for the FBI probe of Kavanaugh, Biden released a strongly-worded statement Friday defending his handling of the Hill hearings and praising the decision to reopen the FBI background investigation.

Related -- 'DON'T LOOK AWAY FROM ME!'

Sen. Flake, after confrontation with sex assault survivor, calls for FBI investigation of Kavanaugh

"Despite every effort to distort my words and record, I insisted on and got an FBI investigation 27 years ago," Biden said. "It was the right thing to do then and it is the right thing to do now."

In Kavanaugh’s case, the agents will likely have particular interest in speaking with Mark Judge.

Ford said Judge, a close high school friend of Kavanaugh's, was in the room when he pinned her to a bed, tried to pull off her clothes and clasped his hand over her mouth to stifle her screams.

Judge had sent letters to the committee saying he did not recall any encounter between Kavanaugh and Ford.

But late Friday, Judge said in a letter to the committee that he was willing to cooperate with the FBI probe.

Image: Donald Trump, Christopher WrayPresident Donald Trump sits with FBI Director Christopher Wray during the FBI National Academy graduation ceremony in Quantico, Va on Dec. 15, 2017.Evan Vucci / AP file

An attorney for PJ Smyth, another person who Ford said was in the house when she was attacked, said his client "is happy to cooperate fully with this FBI investigation."

As for the the [sic] time frame, experts say the work can be done in a matter of days in most circumstances.

Ron Hosko, a former FBI assistant director, said background investigations done by the bureau typically have short turnaround times because the requesting agency needs the information quickly in order to make a decision on the nominee.

The FBI cannot force someone to talk to them as part of the process.

"Based on what we publicly know as far as the universe of people,* I don't see any reason why the FBI could not complete an investigation within one week," said Mark Zaid, a Washington lawyer and expert in security clearance and background investigations.

"Remember, they're not reaching a decision or recommendation. They are just compiling the investigation and reporting on it."

Contributors Associated Press


THIS IS A VERY STRANGE ENGLISH LANGUAGE CONSTRUCTION IN THE VERY LAST PARAGRAPH. IT MAY BE LAWYER-SPEAK, OF COURSE, OR THE WRITER MAY BE FOREIGN.

“PUBLICLY KNOW”... AS FAR AS THE UNIVERSE OF PEOPLE ....” I’M ONLY GUESSING, BUT IT SEEMS TO MEAN THAT WITHOUT KNOWING ALL OF THE CLOSELY HELD FACTS, AND GIVEN THE SMALL NUMBER OF APPARENT WITNESSES AVAILABLE, IT WON’T TAKE AS LONG AS A FULL INVESTIGATION WOULD. THE FBI SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT IN A WEEK.” NOW WHY COULDN’T HE HAVE SAID THAT? HE SHOULDN’T USE A WORD LIKE “UNIVERSE” TO MEAN A VERY SMALL NUMBER WHICH COULD BE DESCRIBED BY “GROUP” THOUGH, ESPECIALLY IN ORDINARY SPEECH AND TO ORDINARILY TRAINED PEOPLE. I LOOKED IT UP AND IT IS A MATHEMATICAL TERM, USED MAINLY IN SET THEORY.

FROM WIKIPEDIA:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe_(mathematics) “IN MATHEMATICS, AND PARTICULARLY IN SET THEORY, CATEGORY THEORY, TYPE THEORY, AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF MATHEMATICS, A UNIVERSE IS A COLLECTION THAT CONTAINS ALL THE ENTITIES ONE WISHES TO CONSIDER IN A GIVEN SITUATION.”

HERE IS A SIMILARLY WORDED SENTENCE, “UNIVERSE OF OBLIGATION,” MEANING ABOUT THE SAME THING AS I WAS TRYING TO EXPRESS IN MY COMMENTS ABOVE. I COLLECTED BOTH PARAGRAPHS BECAUSE IT ALSO EXPRESSES THE MOST DISGUSTING PART, IN MY PERSONAL VIEW, OF WHAT BEING A HUMAN CAN MEAN. I OFTEN WONDER HOW PEOPLE CAN DO THOSE THINGS THAT OCCURRED IN HITLER’S GERMANY; AND THIS IS A VERY UNDERSTANDABLE, IF EMOTIONLESS, EXPLANATION OF THE THINKING PATTERN.

YOU WILL NOTICE IT’S A DISSERTATION ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST AND THE SHOCKING WAY THAT THE CHRISTIAN GERMANS FELL ON THE JEWS AND SOME OTHER GROUPS, IN AN EFFORT TO DESTROY THEM TOTALLY. LUCKILY, WE HUMANS ARE A STURDY AND FLEXIBLE LOT. THE JEWS WHO WERE ABLE TO SCRAPE TOGETHER A FEW DOLLARS TRIED TO LEAVE GERMANY BEFORE HITLER’S FOLLOWERS COULD CAPTURE THEM. SOME STAYED AND FOUGHT IN AN UNDERGROUND MOVEMENT.

https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/defining-community-universe-obligation
Holocaust and Human Behavior

“UNIVERSE OF OBLIGATION”

“How the members of a group, a nation, or a community define who belongs and who does not has a lot to do with how they define their universe of obligation. Sociologist Helen Fein coined this phrase to describe the group of individuals within a society “toward whom obligations are owed, to whom rules apply, and whose injuries call for amends.” In other words, a society’s universe of obligation includes those people who that society believes deserve respect and whose rights it believes are worthy of protection.

A society’s universe of obligation can change. Individuals and groups that are respected and protected members of a society at one time may find themselves outside of the universe of obligation when circumstances are different—such as during a war or economic depression.”



THIS NEXT IS A VERY INTERESTING AND, AT THE SAME TIME, CONCERNING ARTICLE. READ THE MURDER AND ASSAULT RECORDS AGAINST WOMEN IN SOUTH CAROLINA, USUALLY COMMITTED BY THEIR SIGNIFICANT OTHER. FIRST, I’M GLAD I’VE NEVER SPENT MORE THAN A FEW WEEKENDS IN SOUTH CAROLINA, AND SECOND THAT I DIDN’T MARRY A MAN FROM THERE. THIRD, LINDSEY GRAHAM HAS APPARENTLY DONE LITTLE TO HELP WOMEN, AND HAS EVEN VOTED REPEATEDLY AGAINST THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT.

FINALLY, SEE THE LAST FEW PARAGRAPHS WHERE THE TERM “SOUTHERN CULTURE” IS GIVEN AS THE REASON FOR THAT MURDER RATE. HE HAS DEFINED IT EXACTLY RIGHT. IT’S PATRIARCHY IMPLYING OWNERSHIP OF THE WIFE AND FAMILY. IT’S INTERESTING, THOUGH, THAT THE EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH MURDER AND ASSAULT RATE ISN’T EVERYWHERE IN THE SOUTH TO SUCH A DEGREE, BUT RATHER SPECIFICALLY IN SOUTH CAROLINA. I WISH THERE WERE SOME EXPLANATION GIVEN HERE FOR THAT FACT. OF COURSE, IT COULD BE JUST GOOD OLD FASHIONED “IGNORANCE.” I USE THAT WORD ONLY WHEN I MEAN MORE THAN “UNSCHOOLED,” BUT HOSTILE AS WELL.

I WANT TO LIKE GRAHAM, BUT I JUST CAN’T NOW. I KEEP THINKING OF HOW HE LOOKED WHEN HE WAS SHOUTING AT THE WORLD IN GENERAL ON THURSDAY AFTERNOON ABOUT HOW UNFAIR THE EVIL DEMS HAVE BEEN TO POOR BRETT KAVANAUGH AND HIS PARTY. FOR INSTANCE, IT WAS SO WRONG OF SENATOR FEINSTEIN TO WITHHOLD THE LETTER FROM PROFESSOR FORD UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE, EVEN THOUGH SHE HAD BEEN ASKED TO DO THAT ON GROUNDS OF THE WOMAN’S PRIVACY. THEY DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW THEY DENIED PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PICK FOR THE WHOLE TIME HE WAS IN OFFICE, OR WHERE THE MISSING KAVANAUGH PAPERS ARE. I REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHAT’S IN THOSE.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/29/lindsey-graham-disregards-violence-toward-women-and-his-state-womens-murder-capital
Published on
Saturday, September 29, 2018
by Informed Comment
Lindsey Graham Disregards Violence Toward Women, and His State Is a Women's Murder Capital
Graham’s tone deafness to rape victims is nothing new. He has consistently voted against the Violence against Women Act.
byJuan Cole

IMAGE -- "Perhaps what with being a senator and lawmaker and elite and all, Sen. Graham could do something about the high rates of violence against women in his state," Cole writes. (Photo: MSNBC/Screengrab)

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) made it abundantly clear in the hearing on Thursday that he cares more about Republican Party control of the Supreme Court than about rape victims. He implied that the charges of sexual assault that have surfaced against Brett Kavanaugh are a Democratic Party plot to deny Trump a Supreme Court justice.

He angrily threatened to smear the next Democratic nominee in turn.

Graham’s charge of conspiracy makes no sense, since the Democrats did not make Dr. Blasey Ford come forward, nor did they make the other three women come forward (one, in Montgomery County, has for the time being withdrawn her complaint with the police; perhaps she feared being treated by Graham and his pack hounds the way Dr. Blasey Ford was.)

The Republican evangelicals are always attacking Muslim fundamentalism for not giving equal rights to women. Actually modern Muslim states like Tunisia have women’s equality in the constitution. But it is true that some Muslim fundamentalists argue that a woman’s testimony in court should be worth half that of a man, which makes convicting a man of rape almost impossible. Ironically, the attitude of the Republican men on the Judiciary Committee is the same as would be that of a Muslim fundamentalist. They clearly believe that the testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, a high-powered professor of psychiatry at Palo Atlo and Stanford Universities, counts for less than that of a preppie white elite male.

Graham’s tone deafness to rape victims is nothing new. He has consistently voted against the Violence against Women Act. Indeed, the Republican Congress is going to let the act expire this weekend, ironically the same weekend they will shoehorn Kavanaugh onto the Supreme Court. Nobody on cable news will tell you that or make the connection.

In Graham’s worldview, the Democrats got their nominees, whom he voted for, and they are being beastly to take this one away from the Republicans. But he neglects to mention what was done to Merrick Garland by the GOP. And he unfairly blames the Democratic Party for Kavanaugh’s behavior as a besotted youth (one woman would have been an accusation; 4 are a certainty).

Sen. Graham called the hearing, which merely allowed Kavanaugh’s alleged victim to state her experience, the worst thing he had ever seen in his career in politics.

Graham supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq, which left hundreds of thousands dead, destabilized the Middle East, created 4 million refugees, and led to the rise of the hyper-fundamentalist ISIL/ Daesh in a formerly secular and socialist country. I’d gently suggest that that was the worst thing we’ve seen in his political career, and that whether Kavanaugh is called to account for instances in his youth where he, allegedly, tried violently to insert his penis in an unwilling girl pales in comparison. Or perhaps Graham thinks the honor of a white gentleman outweighs the displacement of 4 million brown Iraqis.

Graham’s hierarchy of values may explain why he as senator has not done more about the severe problem his own state of South Carolina has with violence toward women. It really is an outlier nationally in this regard.

The state, among all fifty, with the very highest rate of women killed by men in 2014 was South Carolina ((pop. 5 million).

In the past decade, South Carolina has ranked in the top five states for for women murdered by men.

The proportion of women killed by men per population in South Carolina is TWICE the national average in the US.

An astonishing 92% of female murder victims knew their murderer, and 62% had been in an intimate relationship with the killer.

Some 36,000 domestic and intimate partner assaults are reported every year in South Carolina.

South Carolina’s rate of sexual assault has been higher than the national average since 1982 and increased by 12% a year in some years of this decade.

More than half of all victims of sexual assault in South Carolina are not seen by a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner.

Few prosecutions of sexual assault in South Carolina result in a conviction on that charge; large numbers of cases are never brought, large numbers of the cases brought are dismissed, and most convictions are the result of plea deals in which defendants cop to lesser, non-sexual charges (36% of those charged are only convicted in this way statewide).

Some South Carolinian newspapers have attributed the unusual rates of violence against women in the state to “southern culture” (by which they seem to mean a kind of patriarchy in which the male head of family feels he ‘owns’ the other family members and that outsiders have no business with his private affairs). The leniency of court sentencing, such that violent men who attack women are allowed back out on the street after short terms in jail, is also blamed.

Another indication of low status for women is the rate of death in childbirth. South Carolina has the 9th worst record among the 50 states on this measure. In California, where people in government actually care about the lives and welfare of women, maternal mortality has been cut in half.

In general, South Carolina is a dangerous state, with 501 violent crimes per 100,000 population annually, 35% higher than the rest of the US.

Perhaps what with being a senator and lawmaker and elite and all, Sen. Graham could do something about the high rates of violence against women in his state.


JIM CARREY DOESN’T LIKE GRAHAM, EITHER. LOOK AT HIS PORTRAIT OF GRAHAM IN THIS ARTICLE. CARREY IS A GOOD ARTIST, AND THE HIDEOUS IMAGE IS IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZABLE AS GRAHAM. AND IN ANOTHER STORY, BILL MAHER MAKES A SLY AND VERY DIRTY COMMENT ABOUT KAVANAUGH – IMPLYING THAT LINDSEY GRAHAM IS GAY, AND IN LOVE WITH KAVANAUGH. WORSE THAN THAT, THOUGH WAS THE FACT THAT HE INCLUDED JOHN MCCAIN IN THE REFERENCE. I HAD NEVER HEARD THAT ABOUT EITHER OF THEM, THOUGH WHEN I HEAR THOSE VERY HIGH VOICES ON MEN, I ALWAYS DO WONDER.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/jim-carrey-takes-colorful-swipe-at-lindsey-graham-with-artwork
Jim Carrey takes colorful swipe at Lindsey Graham with artwork
by Vaishnavee Sharma
| September 29, 2018 06:11 PM

Actor Jim Carrey painted a portrait of what he dubbed the "hideous and hateful face" of Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., adding to the series of recent political caricatures the actor has shared on social media.

"Ever wonder why women don’t report sexual abuse?” Carrey wrote on Twitter late Friday. Carrey said Graham's "anger and absolute disdain" toward Christine Blasey Ford, who alleged Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than 30 years ago, keeps other women from reporting assaults.

00:12 / 00:30
VIDEO -- The man who would be speaker

The "Liar Liar" actor said Ford was “courageous, and very credible” in her testimony about her accusation in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. Carrey has previously painted the president as a wicked witch and "Greedzilla," and dubbed the Supreme Court nominee as “entitled,” saying "Injustice Kavanaugh" would “party and pillage their way to the Supreme Court.”

"Talk about 'a disgrace,'" Carrey said, alluding to Kavanaugh's comments from Thursday, when he claimed the confirmation process has become a "national disgrace." Carrey's tweet has been shared by other Twitter users more than 20,000 times and garnered more than 80,000 likes.



THE PROBLEM WITH THIS FBI PROBE IS THAT IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH IT WON’T BE EITHER DEEP ENOUGH OR BROAD ENOUGH TO TURN UP THE VARIOUS THINGS THAT MAY BE THERE TO FIND. A HEAVY DRINKER MAY GET INTO A LARGE AMOUNT OF TROUBLE. THE SENATE HAS THE FBI PROBE SO CIRCUMSCRIBED THAT IT MAY UNCOVER LITTLE INFORMATION. THE AGENTS NEED TO LOOK, ALSO, FOR ANY PARTS OF THE RECORD THAT HAVE BEEN SEALED.

THAT HAPPENS ESPECIALLY WITH WEALTHY YOUNG PEOPLE, AND WHEN IT IS SEALED IT IS USUALLY VERY IMPORTANT. I WILL HOPE FOR THE BEST, THOUGH; AND I’M SURE THAT MOST NORMAL AMERICANS WILL TRUST FORD’S ACCOUNT OVER KAVANAUGH’S HISTRIONICS. I DON’T TRUST THE REPUBLICAN SENATORS NOT TO SEND HIM ON UP TO THE TOP POSITION IN THE COUNTRY, EXCEPT FOR THE PRESIDENCY.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-kavanaugh-ford-fbi-clues-20180928-story.html
Former FBI agents say there are clues to follow from dramatic Kavanaugh hearing
By DEL QUENTIN WILBER
SEP 28, 2018 | 2:15 PM
| WASHINGTON

PHOTOGRAPH – FORD AND HER TWO LAWYERS

Former FBI officials expressed confidence Friday that agents could quickly interview key witnesses and track down potential leads into Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both high school students in the early 1980s.

Doing so might offer greater clarity than the dueling but inconclusive testimony that emerged in a wrenching Senate hearing on Thursday from the 51-year-old California professor and the 53-year-old federal judge.

Ford said she was “100%” certain Kavanaugh had tried to rape her, and Kavanaugh said he was “100%” certain he had never sexually abused Ford or anyone else, leaving senators to decide for themselves who was telling the truth.

Senate Republican leaders agreed Friday afternoon to seek a supplemental FBI background inquiry of Kavanaugh, limited to “current credible allegations” and with a one-week deadline, in an abrupt reversal of their previous refusal to permit further investigation.

They backed down after two potential swing votes in the closely divided Senate — Republicans Jeff Flake of Arizona and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — suggested they would not vote to confirm Kavanaugh until the FBI is given time to probe Ford’s allegations.

Republican leaders moved ahead with a procedural vote on the nomination Friday evening.

Over nearly nine hours of often grueling testimony Thursday, Ford and Kavanaugh provided several details and clues — from names of witnesses to dates and places — that experienced investigators now can chase down.

“There is plenty of lead value in the testimony that was provided during the confirmation hearing and there are plenty of living witnesses that can be identified, contacted and interviewed,” said James McJunkin, a former top FBI official. “They can do this fairly quickly.”

Information from the hearing could provide “crumbs agents could follow,” said Bobby Chacon, a former FBI agent who retired in 2014. “There might less than a handful of interviews they may want to do and follow up.”

FBI spokeswoman Jacqueline Maguire declined to comment.

Ford’s dramatic testimony and details scrawled on the calendars Kavanaugh said he kept from the summer of 1982, when Ford believes the alleged assault occurred, offered promising lines of inquiry, the former officials said.

Among other clues, Ford provided the names of several potential witnesses to her account, including two classmates of Kavanaugh’s at Georgetown Preparatory School in the Washington suburbs.

The friends, Mark Judge and Patrick Smythe, have said in statements that they do not recall the party or the alleged assault. Ford testified that Smythe attended the party and that Judge was present in the bedroom when Kavanaugh groped her and covered her mouth to muffle her screams.

In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday, Judge wrote that he would "cooperate with any law enforcement agency that is assigned to confidentially investigate these allegations."

Ford said Leland Ingham Keyser, a classmate of hers, was present at the party, although not in the room; Keyser has said through her lawyer that she did not recall the gathering and did not know Kavanaugh.* NOTE: THIS STATEMENT IS INCORRECT, ACCORDING TO MSNBC MADDOW BLOG AND TWO OTHER ARTICLES. I HAVE PLACED ONE FROM CNN BELOW THIS.

If the FBI gets involved, agents would probably focus their first interviews on Ford, Kavanaugh, Judge, Smythe and Keyser, former agents said. They would then expand the circle as they developed leads.

Former agents noted that Kavanaugh’s calendar entries from 1982 could help provide timelines and additional witnesses. They noted, for example, a calendar entry on July 1 of a party with several friends, including Judge and Smythe.

Kavanaugh confirmed in his testimony that Chris Garrett, a Georgetown Prep classmate, was at that gathering. Ford testified that Garrett had introduced her to the future judge.

The party was at the home of another Georgetown Prep classmate, Tim Gaudette, according to Kavanaugh’s calendar and testimony. Gaudette did not return text messages or respond to messages left on his voicemail.

Ford told the committee that she drank a beer at the house, and then went upstairs to use the bathroom. At the top of the stairs, she testified, she was pushed into a bedroom across the hall.

During the following assault, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her down and groped her. She escaped after Judge jumped on the bed and they all tumbled to the floor, she testified. She said she ran out of the room and into the bathroom across the hall.

The FBI does not typically investigate crimes that are handled by local authorities, such as sexual assault.

Agents do, however, conduct background investigations on presidential nominees to determine if they are a threat to the United States or a security risk. They submit reports of their investigations to administration officials for consideration.

The White House tapped the bureau in 1991, for example, to look into Anita Hill’s allegations that she was sexually harassed at work by Clarence Thomas, who was later confirmed to the Supreme Court.

In a letter, the police chief and state attorney in Montgomery County, where the assault allegedly occurred, said they would not investigate the incident without a complaint from Ford. They also noted they could do little to prosecute such a case — assault and attempted rape were misdemeanors in 1982 and subject to a one-year statute of limitations.



FORD’S NEED FOR CORROBORATION REMAINS A PROBLEM AS OF THIS AFTERNOON. ESPECIALLY AFTER SEEING BOTH OF THEM TESTIFY ON THURSDAY, I BELIEVE HER TRUTHFULNESS AND HIS DISHONESTY EVEN MORE THAN BEFORE.

HE STRUCK ME AS “OVERACTING,” AND THE ODD-LOOKING HABIT OF STICKING HIS TONGUE IN ONE CHEEK OR THE OTHER, OR MOVING IT DOWN IN FRONT OF HIS LOWER TEETH REALLY BOTHERED ME. IN HIGH SCHOOL I TOOK A DRAMA COURSE. THE TEACHER SUGGESTED DEVELOPING A MANNERISM TO CONVEY A CHARACTER. THAT WAS CALLED “BUSINESS.” THE TONGUE THING WOULD BE CALLED “BUSINESS.” IT’S REPEATED TO SHOW IT AS A PART OF THE PERSON, AND THEREFORE HABITUAL, IN ORDER TO ADD A LIFE-LIKE QUALITY. IT’S THE THING THAT SHOULD DECLARE THAT HE IS NOT AN ACTOR. IF IT IS SUBTLE I THINK IT REALLY HELPS, BUT IN THIS CASE WHAT HE WAS DOING WAS EXTREME IN APPEARANCE, AND EVEN BIZARRE, TO MY EYES. YOUR “BUSINESS” SHOULD BE BELIEVABLE OR IT JUST LOOKS LIKE BAD ACTING.

HE DID NOT LOOK LIKE ANYONE I HAD EVER SEEN BEFORE, AND HE DIDN’T SEEM TO BE GIVING A TRUE REACTION OF ANY KIND AT ALL. IF WHAT HE WAS DOING WAS NOT IN FACT ACTING, IT WAS POTENTIALLY A SIGN OF DERANGEMENT. I THINK IT WAS ACTING. WHAT HE WAS TRYING TO PORTRAY WAS TERRIBLE INWARD GRIEF AND ANGER, BUT WHAT I SAW WAS MAINLY ANGER AND MAYBE A LITTLE PANIC. DR. FORD, ON THE OTHER HAND, SHOWED CLEAR GRIEF, AND WITH NO OVERACTING OR HISTRIONICS. SHE SHOULD BE ON THE SUPREME COURT, INSTEAD OF HIM. IF HE WAS NOT ACTING, THEN I FEEL SURE HE IS MENTALLY UNSTABLE.

KAVANAUGH STRIKES ME AS A VERY STRANGE MAN. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY A TEENAGED BOY OR A YOUNG MAN WOULD KEEP A MOMENT TO MOMENT DIARY FOR YEARS, AND SAVE THEM FOR THIS LONG, UNLESS HE IS A VERY SELF-ABSORBED PERSON. THE ONLY PRACTICAL USE I CAN SEE FOR THAT IS TO ARTIFICIALLY BOLSTER A PIECED-TOGETHER STORY FOR A TIME PERIOD WHICH HE HAD GOOD REASON TO KNOW MIGHT COME BACK TO HAUNT HIM.

ALL IN ALL, I WAS VERY DISSATISFIED BY WHAT I SAW, AND I WANT TO SEE A THOROUGH FBI REPORT ON HIM. THAT PROBABLY WON’T HAPPEN, THOUGH. I COULD CRY RIGHT NOW THINKING ABOUT THE SITUATION OUR COUNTRY IS IN, AND THEREFORE PERHAPS I AND MY FRIENDS MAY BE AS WELL. I DO FEEL GOOD ABOUT ONE THING, THOUGH. THE REPUBLICANS WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY LOSE SEATS IN BOTH HOUSES, AND THE DEMOCRATS CAN COMBAT THE EFFECTS OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS AN OPINION POLL RIGHT NOW, BOTH ON KAVANAUGH AND ON WHO IS MOST LIKELY TO WIN IN NOVEMBER.

THERE IS ONE OTHER THING THAT THE VOTERS MIGHT DO – BOMBARD THE SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WITH COMMUNICATIONS BY PHONE, BY MAIL AND BY INTERNET WITH A SINGLE MESSAGE: DROP KAVANAUGH! POST SIGNS ON THE STREETS. OR, TO USE THE OLD-FASHIONED WORD, AGITATE!

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/29/politics/ford-friend-cooperate-fbi/index.html
Christine Blasey Ford's friend is not refuting Ford's allegation, will cooperate with FBI, lawyer says
By Ariane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter
Updated 3:26 PM ET, Sat September 29, 2018

(CNN)Leland Ingham Keyser, a friend of the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault when they were at a party in high school, does not refute the veracity of the allegation, although she does not remember the alleged incident, her lawyer said in a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, claims that during a party in the early 1980s at which Keyser and several others were present, Kavanaugh drunkenly pushed her into a bedroom, pinned her down and attempted to remove her clothes before she was able to escape. Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the allegation.

"Ms. Keyser does not refute Dr. Ford's account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford's account," Keyser's attorney, Howard Walsh, wrote in the letter, which was sent to the committee overnight Friday. "However, the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question."

Walsh also said in the letter that Keyser will "cooperate fully" with an FBI investigation into the allegation.

The letter comes after emotional testimony from Ford and Kavanaugh about the allegation at a committee hearing Thursday. Keyser felt the need for the letter, Walsh wrote, to clarify a previous statement about the allegation, which came up at the hearing and which she believed made it sound as if she did not believe the party had occurred.

The previous statement, which Walsh released to CNN and the committee last week, said, "Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford."

In her testimony Ford said she remembered that Keyser, a longtime friend, was present at the party, but that it is not surprising Keyser would not recall the party because Ford did not tell her about the alleged assault at the time.

A painful hearing lays bare nation's political flaws

"Oh no, she didn't know about the event," Ford told the committee, "She was downstairs during the event and I did not share it with her."

Kavanaugh mentioned Keyser's statement several times during his testimony to stress that no one who Ford alleges attended the party has come forward to say they remembered being there.

In addition, two others have issued statements saying they don't remember the party in question.

"I have no memory of this alleged incident," said Mark Judge, Kavanaugh's friend, who Ford alleged was in the bedroom during the assault. In a letter he sent to the Judiciary Committee last week, Judge also said he did not recall the party and never saw Kavanaugh act in the matter Ford describes.

Another person Ford claims was at the party, Patrick J. Smyth, has issued a statement in a letter from his lawyer to the committee saying he had no knowledge of the party or the allegation.

Jeff Flake's moment: How a reliable conservative cast Kavanaugh's confirmation into doubt

"I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as 'PJ' who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post," Smyth said in the statement. "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh."

"Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women," the statement continued. "To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the Committee may have."

On Friday, the White House agreed to ask the FBI to investigate "current credible allegations" as a part of Kavanaugh's background check. Lawyers for Judge and Smyth said they would cooperate.

Additional allegation

Besides Ford's allegation, the FBI is looking at the accusation of another woman, Deborah Ramirez, who has alleged Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at dormitory party while the two were undergraduate students at Yale. The FBI has reached out to Ramirez, her attorney said, confirming a report in The Washington Post.

"We can confirm the FBI has reached out to interview Ms. Ramirez and she has agreed to cooperate with their investigation," the attorney, John Clune, said in a statement. "Out of respect for the integrity of the process, we will have no further comment at this time."

Kavanaugh and the White House have denied Ramirez's allegation, which was reported by The New Yorker.

"This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen, Kavanaugh said in a statement last Sunday when The New Yorker published the article. "The people who knew me then know this did not happen and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple."

CNN has not independently confirmed Ramirez's allegations.

Ramirez's lawyers wrote a letter to the leaders of the Judiciary Committee this week saying Ramirez, who lives in Colorado, was willing to cooperate with them regarding her allegation as well as a separate letter to the FBI's field office in Denver requesting that her allegation be included in the agency's background investigation for Kavanaugh's nomination.

CNN's Caroline Kelly contributed to this report.


I DO HOPE THE SENATE REPUBLICANS WILL THINK HARD AND LONG ABOUT DENYING THE SUPREME COURT POSITION TO KAVANAUGH. THIS LETTER FROM THE BAR ASSOCIATION APPARENTLY WAS SENT SPONTANEOUSLY RATHER THAN AT THE REQUEST OF DEMOCRATS, SO THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THEY SEE ON THE NEWS.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/09/28/extraordinary-and-remarkable-request-bar-association-calls-gop-delay-vote-order-fbi
Published on
Friday, September 28, 2018
byCommon Dreams
With 'Extraordinary' and 'Remarkable' Request, Bar Association Calls on GOP to Delay Vote, Order FBI Probe into Kavanaugh
As White House and Republicans hit throttle to confirm nominee despite sexual assault allegations, nation's largest association of lawyers says lifetime appointment "simply too important to rush to a vote"
byJon Queally, staff writer

PHOTOGRAPH -- Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill September 27, 2018 in Washington, DC. (Photo: Melina Mara-Pool/Getty Images)

Following the "powerful" testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and his "unhinged" performance before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, the American Bar Association—which had previously bestowed the rating of "well-qualified" on the Supreme Court nominee—pulled its support by calling for a delay in his confirmation and a thorough investigation by the FBI into the sexual assault allegations that three women have now publicaly [sic] made against him.

"This is indeed remarkable!" —Karine Jean-Pierre, MoveOn.org

"The basic principles that underscore the Senate’s constitutional duty of advice and consent on federal judicial nominees require nothing less than a careful examination of the accusations and facts by the FBI," wrote Robert Carlson, president of the ABA, the nation's largest organization of lawyers, in a letter addressed to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the committee chair, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif), its ranking member.

While progressive forces opposed to Kavanaugh are mobilizing for mass demonstrations on Friday to demand senators reject Kavanaugh and Republicans circle the wagons to rush him through to a vote, the letter by the ABA comes as a striking blow by a seemingly less partisan organization that sees itself as defending the reputation of the legal committee, advocating for the "rule of law," and represents the collective voice of over 400,000 of the nation's licensed lawyers.

While Kavanaugh during Thursday's hearing repeatedly refused opportunities to endorse the FBI investigation that the White House and Senate Republicans have also rejected out of hand, Carlson's letter argued that such a probe was clearly needed and that a vote by the committee—currently scheduled for 9:30 AM on Friday—was wholly inappropriate.

"Each appointment to our nation’s Highest Court (as with all others) is simply too important to rush to a vote," the letter states. "Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate's reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court."

In his testimony on Thurdsay, Brett Kavanaugh himself cited the approval he's received from the ABA as did other Republicans, including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who called their system the "gold standard" for rating judicial nominees.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License