PDA

View Full Version : Supreme Court Nominations Are Politicized Because Congress Is Dysfunctional



jimnyc
09-26-2018, 01:04 PM
Yupskies, and that's why we have seen congress with approval ratings in the less than 10% range in the past few decades. Everyone in the nations sees the crap and shenanigans that both sides play.

And imagine that, a republican here, and he wants due process. Whereas a few democrats have already outright stated that Kavanaugh should NOT be afforded such rights. :rolleyes: This senator said from what he's heard thus far, that he believes Kavanaugh, but may be persuaded, and wants to hear the testimony of Dr. Ford first. Imagine that?

But he's not demanding unreasonable delays. He's not making demands of the media. He's not making demands of his fellow colleagues in the senate. He's not making demands on how many questions.

---

Judiciary Republican: Supreme Court Nominations Are Politicized Because Congress Is Dysfunctional

(CNSNews.com) - "I don't know if this will be a discussion of the truth as much as it will be an analysis of the memory," Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said of Thursday's planned hearing for Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh to tell their very different stories about what may or may not have happened some 36 years ago.

Kennedy told MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Wednesday that the entire process has been "marbled with politics," and he placed the blame squarely on a dysfunctional Congress:

(video)

"And if I can say this, Mika, and the Supreme Court in the minds of many fair-minded Americans has become politicized. And do you know whose fault that is, in my judgment? Primarily the United States congress, because we keep punting on the tough issues. Nobody around here wants to be a senator and take a tough vote."

The entire confirmation process doesn't sit well with Kennedy:

"There haven't been many Lincoln moments in this. And I go back to the original confirmation hearing with senators interrupting senators and talking over each other and 240 protesters. I hope that tomorrow does not end up like the original confirmation hearing did. I was embarrassed for us, quite frankly."

Kennedy said he has spoken to Judge Brett Kavanaugh, and although he believes him, he said he is open to the possibility that he could change his mind, depending on what he hears from Ford tomorrow:

"That's the purpose of the hearing," Kennedy said. "Now, I believe judge Kavanaugh. I've spoken directly to judge Kavanaugh. I've asked him point-blank. He is resolute. He's determined. He's not mad at anybody, he didn't speak ugly about anyone, Willie, but he told me categorically, unconditionally did not happen.

"I believe him, but that doesn't mean that I could not be persuaded otherwise. I really want to hear from Dr. Ford and accord her the respect and the due process that she deserves as well as Judge Kavanaugh. I want to treat Dr. Ford as if she were my daughter, but I want to treat Judge Kavanaugh as if he were my son here."

Kennedy said he doesn't expect easy answers at tomorrow's hearing:

"I don't want to bubble wrap this. I think it's going to be very difficult to determine the truth. I have spoken within Brett Kavanaugh. I have the advantage, I guess, of having watched him through 32 hours of testimony. I've read many of his opinions and I've read all of his law review articles.

“I believe him but that doesn't mean that I'm not prepared to be persuaded by Dr. Ford and to listen to her attentively. Let me say it again. I want a country without creepy old men but with due process."

Kennedy, asked why Republicans seem to be rushing Kavanaugh's nomination without benefit of an FBI investigation, said there are several reasons to move along:

"First I think we have to accept reality. There are people on both sides of this nomination who are in good faith, there are people on both sides of this nomination who are not in good faith. It's about power. It's not about truth or memory or fairness. That's just reality.

"Number two, I have always believed that we should have someone in place by October 1 (the start of the new Supreme Court session). I don't think it's fair to have people, litigants, spend a lot of money on important questions to get a case to the United States Supreme Court and you end up with a 4-4 tie. That's not what our Founders intended. That's what's driven me. I will say, I'm not impugning her motives but I'm disappointed that senator Feinstein did not bring these allegations, redacted protecting Dr. Ford's anonymity, to us earlier. I think this would have been a much different process."

Kennedy said Ford and her attorneys have set a lot of the ground rules for Thursday's hearing, including one round of questions, five minutes for each senator; she wants frequent breaks, a smaller hearing room, and one camera, he said.

Ford did not want an outside prosecutor to ask questions on behalf of Senate Republicans, but Kennedy said it's the best way to go:

"Dr. Ford through her counsel was very insistent that we not allow the hearing to be hijacked with theatrics, like the confirmation hearing was in my judgment. We talked about it among ourselves, we meaning the Republicans on the committee, and decided that given the amount of time that we have, Dr. Ford also insisted on just one round of questions, that we would hire somebody who has expertise in trying to ferret out the facts in a case where sexual assault has been alleged.

"I don't know that every committee member has given up the right to ask questions, but I know I intend to defer to -- I can't remember the name of the prosecutor, Ms. Mitchell, I think."

Kennedy said he is not instructing the outside prosecutor "to go Catwoman or Batman on Dr. Ford. That's not the purpose," he said. "The purpose is to elicit information."

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/judiciary-republican-supreme-court-nominations-are-politicized-because

jimnyc
09-26-2018, 01:07 PM
As I just stated, and posted another member yesterday as well...

Kavanaugh is apparently guilty here until he proves his innocence. :rolleyes:

---

Schumer: ‘No Presumption of Innocence’ for Kavanaugh

Addressing the unsubstantiated, last-second accusations of alleged sexual assault leveled against Kavanaugh in light of his nomination, Schumer as asked if Kavanaugh has the presumption of innocent.

“No,” he doesn’t, the burden of proof is on Kavanaugh in a Congressional venue, Schumer said:

REPORTER: "So, do you agree then that he has 'presumption of innocence'?"

SCHUMER: "I agree that we— this is not— that's a criminal trial. What I believe is we ought to get to the bottom and find the facts in the way that the FBI has always done. There's no presumption of innocence or guilt when you have a nominee before you."

https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/schumer-no-presumption-innocence-kavanaugh