The Aggressive Last-Ditch Efforts to Derail Kavanaugh (They’re Not Working)
Old buddies, new media types, and so many others are hellbent on killing this SCOTUS nomination
A Senate procedural vote occurred this morning to end debate on judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. The vote was 51-49 in favor of the nomination’s proceeding — with another vote now scheduled for Saturday.
As the nomination moves forward, it is worth taking a look back at all of the efforts to derail this worthy jurist a Supreme Court seat.
The Senate has been deeply divided over Kavanaugh, and the nation has, too. In the weeks of back and forth over Trump’s Supreme Court nominee in the press and among Americans — under the long shadow of the #MeToo movement — claims about Kavanaugh have ranged from silly (he defended himself in testimony, so he doesn’t have the right “judicial temperament” ) to outrageous (his high school social circle was involved in gang rapes).
The nation has heard far too much about what youthful and silly terms like “boofing”and “the Devil’s Triangle” really mean, as those in the mainstream media — after Dr. Christine Blasey Ford lodged charges of sexual assault against him dating back more than 35 years — have tried to decipher the nominee’s character by putting a microscope to a teenager’s yearbook.
On Thursday night, as Democrats’ hopes of stopping Kavanaugh from ascending to the Supreme Court faded, new focus was aimed at Kavanaugh’s supposed “perjury” in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week.
Kavanaugh lied, multiple parties insisted.
It didn’t seem to matter to many that the last-minute allegations against the nominee with a stellar judicial record remain uncorroborated.
The angle that seemed to gather the most steam was that Kavanaugh lied when he said he had never “blacked out” from drinking as a teen. There is simply no hard evidence that this statement is untrue, even with former Yale University classmate James Roche’s op-ed in Slate, titled “I Was Brett Kavanaugh’s Roommate” — which attempted to tarnish the nominee with scurrilous claims that are years old and unprovable.
Another op-ed, this time in The Washington Post, titled “We Were Brett Kavanaugh’s Drinking Buddies — We Don’t Think He Should be Confirmed,” focused on what these individuals claim they experienced with Kavanaugh — and interestingly, on how much annoyance they’ve had to endure in coming forward — which no one forced them to do.
“We were college classmates and drinking buddies with Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh,” three people say in the piece — people who attended Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, with the nominee. “In the past week, all three of us decided separately to respond to questions from the media regarding Brett’s honesty, or lack thereof.”
This aggressively promoted idea of the nominee’s base untruthfulness appeared on the heels of another stab at smearing the nominee: his purported “non-judicial temperament.” As Ford’s credibility seemed to weaken, with multiple inconsistencies found in her Senate Judiciary Committee testimony, accusations about the emotion Kavanaugh displayed while defending his reputation against Ford’s uncorroborated claims strengthened.
For instance, more than 2,000 law professors signed a letter to the Senate saying Kavanaugh does not have the right temperament to serve. Professors from Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, said they are not speaking on behalf of the institution but are instead acting independently, out of “concern for the country.”
Multiple institutions of higher education leveled disapproval toward the nominee — notably Harvard Law School in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where Kavanaugh has taught for a decade, and Yale.
“Judge Kavanaugh indicated that he can no longer commit to teaching his course in January Term 2019, so the course will not be offered,” Catherine Claypoole, Harvard Law’s associate dean and dean for academic and faculty affairs, wrote in an email to students, which she sent on behalf of the law school’s curriculum committee, reported The Harvard Crimson.
Yale alumni “demanded an investigation” into potential perjury by Kavanaugh.
Another tactic that has proved effective when leftists want their own way is this: taking to the streets. Politically outspoken artists including Lena Dunham and Amy Schumer promoted the protest against Kavanaugh that occurred in the nation’s capital. Alicia Keys and R.E.M. lead singer Michael Stipe were two more of the celebrities lending their names to the event.
The mainstream media also made their pitch against Kavanaugh from their public platforms. Multiple publications made their views very clear — he is not the man for the job. Even so-called conservative columnists like Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post made their opinions clear: Kavanaugh is unfit to serve.
And then there are the virulent feminists who insist on trying to thwart this nomination — this is all about Roe v. Wade to them. The legality of abortion is at stake, and it is their right — their job, as they see it — to do anything and everything to kill the nomination.
— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) October 4, 2018
And then, not to be forgotten, were (and are) the keyboard warriors — progressives with lots of time and a good internet connection to make it their business to plaster social media platforms with anti-Kavanaugh invective. The instances are too many to catalogue here, but a sampling is below.
I sympathize with conservatives on #Kavanaugh. If one judge with a drink problem who assaults woman and lies under oath can be treated like this, all judges with drink problems who assault women and lie under oath can be treated like this. Where will it end!
— Michael Coren (@michaelcoren) October 5, 2018
How hard is it to find a Supreme Court nominee that hasn't been accused of rape? #Kavanaugh
— Timothy Ryan Field (@traderofkind) October 5, 2018
— Dr. David Romei (@DavidRomeiPHD) October 5, 2018
See more about where nomination stands in the video below.