Well, you have to give it to Democrats—they know how to execute a character assassination plot. This zero hour attack on Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who was nominated by President Trump to fill the vacancy by the retiring Anthony Kennedy, has both sides jacked up. Conservatives are rightfully suspicious of such a late night bombshell drop, while liberals hope to use this allegation to derail what they see as a threat to abortion, which is something they remind liberal women every day that they support and love. Here’s the gist. When Kavanaugh was 17-year-old, he allegedly tried to sexually assault Christine Blasey Ford, who currently works as a research psychologist and professor at Palo Alto University. Yes, she’s a Democrat. Yes, it’s odd how she wrote to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) office in the summer, a letter that the California Democrat sat on until last week. The Senate Judiciary Committee vote was slated for this Thursday—and Kavanaugh has the votes to be confirmed. This move has plunged the entire process into chaos. Kavanaugh has denied the accusation. Ford says she will testify before the committee. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), a key vote on the committee, now says the vote should be delayed until this is investigated. Guy suggested a closed-door session, with questions pitched by a nonpartisan attorney.
Now, oddly enough Ford’s lawyer, Debra Katz, who is anti-Trump and has no love for his supporters, says her client hasn’t said that Kavanaugh shouldn’t be confirmed. Right, and what does she expect with an allegation, which may be impossible to prove, like this. It happened over 30 years ago, by the way. The parties involved have given different accounts. Mark Judge, the second person who was allegedly in the bedroom with Kavanaugh and Ford when this supposed attempted assault took place denies this ever happened, so we have a he said she said, with no corroborative witnesses. Also, as with most who behave badly with women, there aren’t any other accusers. Folks who have been exposed often have multiple victims. Also, the notes from which these allegations were dredged up—Ford told of the encounter in 2012 during marriage counseling—has the number of people in the room off by two; notes say four, but Ford says it was Judge and Kavanaugh, explaining that her therapist made the discrepancy.
So, is Feinstein being rewarded for her sniper shot? I mean there willbe a hearingon this, which Democrats aren’t cooperatingin any way, shape, or form. The answer is no; she’s being hit from some in the media and her opponent in California, state Sen. Kevin de Leon. First, Daily Beast’s Michael Tomasky asked plainly: what the hell are you doing, Dianne?
Mind-boggling. Here we were, in late July, two weeks after Donald Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Mitch McConnell had yet to announce the confirmation hearing dates, which he announced on Aug. 9. But obviously, in late July, the Democrats were well aware that they had the fight of their lives on their hands; that they were outnumbered and would need something huge. And here is Feinstein, the ranking member of the committee, holding that something in her hands.
And she kept it secret. From her colleagues. According to the New Yorker, her staff even told other Democrats on the committee that the incident was “taken care of” and that it was too far in the past to be worth discussing in public. She had no right to keep it from them. For that matter, she had no right to keep it from us, the public, who also live with the consequences of a new Supreme Court.
Maybe Feinstein feared that if she shared the letter, the woman’s name would leak out. Maybe she felt it wasn’t her story to tell. A reasonable concern. But okay—share the letter while redacting the woman’s name. It took me four seconds to think of that.
Maybe she feared being attacked for bringing in something this controversial and ancient. Okay. But what did she think was going to happen? Did she think she’d be able to sit on this letter forever and not even refer it to the FBI? Hot documents have a way of getting out in this town. At the very least, when her colleagues started asking her about it, she should have owned up and told them the truth and shared it with them and asked their advice.
And now where are we? She’s made an absolute disaster of things. It got out anyway. If anything, by holding it so long, she has helped facilitate the discrediting of the woman who is accusing Kavanaugh here, because it looks desperate and eleventh-hour, whereas if she’d made this public before, people would have had time to process it and Republicans couldn’t have made that accusation.
But now, single-handedly, she has returned things to the Incompetent Democrats narrative. Well, no. Not Incompetent Democrats. Incompetent Democrat, singular. Beyond belief.
She’s running for reelection, and under California’s jungle primary, her general-election opponent is a fellow Democrat, Kevin De Leon, who’s challenging her from the left. De Leon is no Bernie bro; he endorsed Clinton. Feinstein has been 20 to 25 points ahead, and De Leon hasn’t made the best case for himself. Well, Feinstein just made the best possible case for him. She might still win, but next year, the Democrats should absolutely kick her off the committee for this.
And yes, De Leon wasted no time attacking his opponent. De Leon is a Democrat. California’s jungle primary system, in which the top two vote getters advance regardless of party affiliation, has the California Senate race with two Democrats on the ballot. For Republicans in the state, it’s a gloomy situation, but while Feinstein is no friend of the Trump agenda, having her in office would be much better than De Leon—the ghost gun man. Still, she’s facing attacks on all fronts (via Politico):
De León, in an interview with POLITICO Friday, blasted Feinstein for not raising the issue as Kavanaugh sat before the Judiciary committee for his confirmation hearings last week — or even discussing the matter privately her fellow Democrats on the Judiciary committee until this week.
Her performance underscores how “she has historically demonstrated that she is not willing to take the fight to the Republicans,” he said. “She has been very passive in her approach regarding the most important Supreme Court nominee in a generation,’’ showing “a huge detachment to the realities” of women’s experiences in many communities.
At a time when Kavanaugh’s confirmation potentially endangers “a woman’s right to choose, voting rights and civil rights,’’ De León added, other Judiciary committee Democrats were “looking for an opportunity to delay the hearings,’’ he said. The letter’s contents, he said, provided critical doubts about the nominee. “This was it — and she was sitting on it for three months,’’ he said.
De Leon has also said that the Senate should be shut down:
Feinstein is “playing polite, country-club politics,” as she pursues records from Kavanaugh’s time in the George W. Bush White House, state Sen. Kevin de León complained in a recent e-mail to supporters. And she and other Senate Democrats aren’t leveraging all the procedural tools they have to stall Kavanaugh’s confirmation. As de León told California Democratic activists in July, “We need to shut the Senate down!”
The criticism is part of de León’s effort to take on Feinstein from the left, arguing she is too cautious and centrist for California. Despite winning the endorsement of state Democrats in an executive committee vote in July, the former state Senate president has struggled to gain traction with regular voters. In a Public Policy Institute of California poll conducted last month, Feinstein held a nearly two-to-one lead . The two Democrats are facing off in the general election after finishing first and second in California’s “top-two” primary system in June.
While Feinstein has taken heat from liberal groups in the past, she has drawn support for her role in Kavanaugh’s confirmation fight. Several said her focus on obtaining access to Bush-era documents is appropriate, given her position as the senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
It must be a kick to the teeth for Dianne, though I don't particularly care for her. She failed to get her state party’s endorsement. Now, she’s being dragged for botching the release of this information, which appears to be so long ago, again, it might not be able to be verified. She positioned herself as the brigade commander to lead a charge against Kavanaugh. It looked like it was going to end up being the Pickett’s Charge of American politics.
Sen. Chuck Grassely (R-IA) made it official that there will be hearings, which Katie touched upon yesterday:
Anyone who comes forward as Dr. Ford has deserves to be heard, so I will continue working on a way to hear her out in an appropriate, precedented and respectful manner.
“The standard procedure for updates to any nominee’s background investigation file is to conduct separate follow-up calls with relevant parties. In this case, that would entail phone calls with at least Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford. Consistent with that practice, I asked Senator Feinstein’s office yesterday to join me in scheduling these follow-ups. Thus far, they have refused. But as a necessary step in evaluating these claims, I’ll continue working to set them up.
“Unfortunately, committee Republicans have only known this person's identity from news reports for less than 24 hours and known about her allegations for less than a week. Senator Feinstein, on the other hand, has had this information for many weeks and deprived her colleagues of the information necessary to do our jobs. The Minority withheld even the anonymous allegations for six weeks, only to later decide that they were serious enough to investigate on the eve of the committee vote, after the vetting process had been completed.
“It’s deeply disturbing that the existence of these allegations were leaked in a way that seemed to preclude Dr. Ford’s confidentiality.
“Over my nearly four decades in the Senate I have worked diligently to protect whistleblowers and get to the bottom of any issue. Dr. Ford’s attorney could have approached my office, while keeping her client confidential and anonymous, so that these allegations could be thoroughly investigated. Nevertheless, we are working diligently to get to the bottom of these claims.”
Whatever the case, prepare for Gangs of New York, or more like Gangs of D.C., to break out over this SCOTUS fight. Democrats want to protect Roe; Republicans see a chance to have a solid 5-4, or even 6-3, majority for the next generation. It won’t get any messier than this, and the Left has set this precedent. Should the GOP execute a blitz like this when it’s our turn to play defense on judges? Yes. Absolutely. It’s time to fight back. It’s about time we hate Democrats more than they hate us.