[ May 13, 2024 ]
Although the media buzz on Monday had pointed to President Trump’s choice of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as the next nominee to the Supreme Court, the announcement was nevertheless an exciting and historic moment. Similar to a starting gun at a track meet, it was a signal that the battle in the Senate can now begin in earnest.
Appeals Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh, 53, has impeccable credentials. A graduate of Yale College and Yale Law School, he currently teaches at Harvard Law School. Kavanaugh once clerked (along with Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch) for Justice Kennedy, whom he has been nominated to replace. He comes across as being a very genuine and likeable man, a loyal husband and a loving, involved father. He evens finds the time to coach his daughters’ basketball teams and to run marathons. Conservatives have given Trump high marks on his pick.
As Sean Hannity said, this decision required President Trump to “thread a political needle.” Although it’s difficult to imagine anyone objecting to this accomplished and good man, Democrats – and even several Republicans – will certainly try.
Story continues below advertisement
Kavanaugh’s nomination could be problematic for pro-choice Republican Senators Susan Collins (ME) and Lisa Murkowski (AK). We actually don’t know if he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade as Collins and Murkowski (and most Democrats) fear, and Kavanaugh is likely too skilled a candidate to be pinned down. For different reasons, Senators Rand Paul (KY) and Ted Cruz (TX) may need a bit of convincing to earn their votes.
This nomination is seen as catastrophic by all of the Democratic Senators, as any of the four names on Donald Trump’s shortlist would have been. They understand that Kavanaugh’s replacement of Justice Kennedy will have consequences and they fear the worst.
Just as President Obama selected liberal Supreme Court nominees, President Trump is selecting conservative nominees. Republicans weren’t thrilled to confirm Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan to the top court, but we lost an election. The Senate confirmed Sotomayor’s nomination in 2009 by a 68-31 vote and Kagan was confirmed the following year by a 63-37 vote.
Democrats have demanded that confirmation hearings be delayed until after the midterms. Yet, when presented with a similar situation in 2010, and worried that they might lose seats in the midterms, they chose to vote before the elections. Kagan’s confirmation occurred in August 2010.
Kavanaugh will be grilled on many issues including Roe v. Wade, second amendment rights and corporate regulations. Democrats will scour and criticize his decisions, especially those regarding the EPA and net-neutrality.
Democrats will point to his role in Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s Whitewater investigation. Kavanaugh wrote “much of the Starr Report that prompted the president’s (Bill Clinton) impeachment—not for the Arkansas real-estate deal that initially prompted the investigation, but for lying under oath when questioned about an affair with a White House intern.”
Kavanaugh worked “for candidate George W. Bush in the recount imbroglio following the November 2000 election and then spent six years in the White House as a lawyer and eventually staff secretary to the president.” He will certainly be attacked for that.
And thanks to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) for introducing the “nuclear option” which changed the requirement of 60 votes to confirm a nominee to a simple majority of only 51 votes, Kavanaugh’s path to confirmation will be easier than it would otherwise have been. Although Reid’s measure did not extend to Supreme Court nominees, current Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) changed the law to include them when it suited Republicans. One of my colleagues at RedState, Joe Cunningham, covered this here.
Confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justices have become increasingly rancorous over the years. The two most memorable confirmation battles were fought over Judges Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas.
Some of us are old enough to remember the outrageous behavior from the left during the 1987 Senate confirmation hearing of Judge Robert Bork, a Reagan nominee. Leading the charge against this highly qualified candidate was that pillar of morality, the “Lion of the Senate,” Ted Kennedy. Sadly, Bork was never confirmed. The left’s campaign to denigrate this good man was so severe, that a new term, “bork,” was coined to describe it. The dictionary definition of bork is:
to attack or defeat (a nominee or candidate for public office) unfairly through an organized campaign of harsh public criticism or vilification…to this day, a nominee sidelined by activists is said to have been “borked.”
The 1991 Senate confirmation process of Justice Clarence Thomas, a George H. W. Bush nominee, pitted the Democrats against the Republicans in another bruising battle. At the time of his nomination, he had only eight months of experience as a federal judge. Most significantly, he was a conservative and he was continually questioned about his position on Roe v. Wade. He claimed he hadn’t yet formed an opinion.
The larger issue was a leaked report alleging that Thomas had sexually harassed law professor Anita Hill, who had worked for Thomas first at the Department of Education (DOE), then at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). While at the DOE (in 1981), Hill claimed:
He (Thomas) spoke about acts that he had seen in pornographic films involving such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes… On several occasions, Thomas told me graphically of his own sexual prowess.
The obvious question is why did she follow him to the EEOC the following year? She answered that “the work, itself, was interesting, and at that time, it appeared that the sexual overtures… had ended.”
According to Hill, the sexual remarks and overtures continued:
Thomas was drinking a Coke in his office, he got up from the table at which we were working, went over to his desk to get the Coke, looked at the can and asked, ‘Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?
Thomas denied the allegations and claimed that Hill had been passed over for promotion and was simply bitter. He called the hearings a “high-tech lynching” stating:
This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.
I recall watching that vote. Thomas was confirmed by a 52-48 margin. It was riveting.
All of this is to warn that we can expect a contentious confirmation battle. Nancy Pelosi has vowed to “avenge Obama” by fighting this nomination. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) said Kavanaugh must “not become the next Justice and that it will take all of us to fight against him.” Center for American Progress leader Neera Tanden said, “We must ensure that we defeat Brett Kavanaugh. All of our rights are at stake.”
The fight ahead is certain to become bitter, but in the darkest moments, we must all breathe a sigh of relief that President Hillary Clinton is not choosing the nominees for the Supreme Court – or any court.
The Truth Must be Told
Your contribution supports independent journalism
Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.
Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.
Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.
Please contribute here.
or
Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.
Quick note: We cannot do this without your support. Fact. Our work is made possible by you and only you. We receive no grants, government handouts, or major funding.Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here.
Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s essential NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America's survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.
Follow Pamela Geller on Gettr. I am there. click here.
Follow Pamela Geller on Trump's social media platform, Truth Social. It's open and free.
Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.
Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spammy or unhelpful, click the - symbol under the comment to let us know. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
If you would like to join the conversation, but don't have an account, you can sign up for one right here.
If you are having problems leaving a comment, it's likely because you are using an ad blocker, something that break ads, of course, but also breaks the comments section of our site. If you are using an ad blocker, and would like to share your thoughts, please disable your ad blocker. We look forward to seeing your comments below.
18 Comments
5 years ago
The idea that because midterms is coming up as an excuse to not vote on this is ridiculous! Kagan was put in three months prior to the MIDTERM, when the republicans won the majority. So Kamila Harris can get over herself.
Kagan legislates from the bench and thinks nothing of the constitution she swore to uphold and neither does Sotomayer or Ginsburg for that matter. Our country needs a stable court that is a literal interpretation of the US constitution. No more “living breathing” Constitution rulings!
This leads to arbitrary “justice” rulings.
During the end of ******Obama’s****** last term, Obama should NOT have the right to stack the court with Garfield, another liberal when he as President is leaving. Trump is not in his last term. I expect him to get TWO terms with ease and horrendous angst on the part of DEMS.
To stop DEMS they will try everything. Watch an imaginary SEX SCANDAL emerge about Kavanaugh. That usually works for them. It; worked for Judge Moore and a Republican governor. Remember truth never matters to DEMS. Also thanks Harry Reid for putting in place the NUCLEAR option of a SIMPLE MAJORITY instead of 60 votes needed to confirm. These things come back to bite you!
5 years ago
Reply to
felix1999
Trump is not even at the end of his first term, but has at least 1 1/2 years before the primaries that would be the end of his first term.
5 years ago
Here you go!
SEX SCANDAL!
Fallon spelled out two tactics that he claimed were potential
“wild card” issues in the nomination.
One is to attempt to stall Kavanaugh’s confirmation pending the release and full review of the thousands of pages of the Starr Report, which documented the case to impeach President Clinton and which was drafted in part by Kavanaugh.
The second tactic is to raise questions, despite any current evidence, about whether Kavanaugh knew about sexual harassment allegations related to former Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski for which Kavanaugh clerked in 1991.
Kozinski announced his retirement in December 2017 after numerous women claimed in Washington Post interviews that they were subjected to inappropriate sexual behavior. Kavanaugh was one of many lawyers who clerked for Kozinski, and Fallon presented NO evidence that Kavanaugh would have known about any of those charges. Indeed, Cuomo took issue with Fallon’s strategy, and the activist made clear he had NO actual evidence but still planned to raise questions.
5 years ago
Oh no!!!!!!
LOL!!!!
Report: SCOTUS Nominee Kavanaugh
Allegedly Called Hillary ‘B*tch’ 20 Years Ago
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh allegedly mouthed the word “bitch” at an image of Hillary Clinton during former President Bill Clinton’s 1997 State of the Union address.
“I saw one of Ken Starr’s deputies, Brett Kavanaugh, who was sitting across from me, mouth the word bitch when the camera panned to Hillary,” Media Matters founder David Brock wrote in his 2002 book Blinded by the Right.
The excerpt from the book was tweeted by Robert Costa, a far-left reporter at the anti-Trump Washington Post.
…
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/10/report-scotus-nominee-kavanaugh-allegedly-called-hillary-btch-20-years-ago/
5 years ago
Reply to
Andrew Sears
I called her the same thing almost 30 yrs ago when she and Billy-boy first appeared on the national scene!
5 years ago
You called the Negro “President”. That means you don’t understand what is going on and have a waycist temperament. STOP PANDERING TO NEGROES, kay?
The Negro was never a legal US President. Some people need to be HANGED for this!!
5 years ago
Reply to
Alleged-Comment
Agree with all you say, except the word “Negro”. “o’s” a MULATTO. There’s too many decent blacks in the USA to insist “o” is one…
5 years ago
Reply to
John Flynn
Some older Negroes prefer to be called Negroes. Smarter then the rest of ’em.
I consider calling people “bl*ck” to be an ETHNIC lieberal slur. I looked up the word (have you?) and found it is one of the most negative adjectives in the English language.
Who the hell wants to be called “BL*CK”???
Then I looked up “Negro” and found an elegant description. And since we have been calling them “bl*ck” their behavior has taken a turn for the WORSE. Words have power, you know.
And that word came from a vile backward leftist revolting Negro.
5 years ago
Reply to
Alleged-Comment
We, white Americans, have been using the term “black” since Jesse Jackson insisted on the term in the mid-60s, while a protege of MLK. Not all blacks were African therefore the term Afro-American didn’t pertain to all blacks. Lew Alcinder said that back when he played for UCLA. I always thought the term “Negro” was a peaceful and unoffensive term. Now, after all these years i will use the term “negro” and will be insulting blacks when I do, some of them actually deserve it
5 years ago
Reply to
Alleged-Comment
Yes, do not be foolish and fall fol liberal slander. Stop calling Negroes “bl*ck”.
Many Negroes are FOOLED by this, BUT a few Negroes do get it.
Lloyd Marcus
Ron Edwards
Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson.
I won’t beat around the bush and not tell you Negroes have the lowest IQ of the human race – ON AVERAGE.
Every race has their own characteristic, divergent and/or exaggerated within their IQ limit. LIVE WITH IT.
5 years ago
The left is in complete mass hysteria by viewing President Trump’s Supreme Court picks as direct threats to abortion under Roe v Wade. Were this Hillary’s second Supreme Court choice, it is the Second Amendment on which there would be a more credible threat.
If they come for my guns, they had better bring theirs.
Be safe, be trained, be alert.
5 years ago
The lefty media was already blowing smoke about Trump’s “controversial” candidate hours before one was even announced. Speaks volumes.
5 years ago
This is Trump building the foundation of the most important building he has ever made. The USA! Thank you Trump and Jesus!
5 years ago
The more knowledgeable Dems will pass Kavanaugh because, despite their present attack of the vapors, they know he’s relatively benign compared to the other candidates Trump has in mind. This is the president’s peace offering, Lefties. Take it while it’s on the table.
5 years ago
good
5 years ago
One of the major Dem arguing point is the Roe v Wade decision, but remember, folks, if the decision is overturned then it goes back to the states, giving them the opportunity for abortions. Whether pro or con, abortions in most states, as I understand it, will remain. The dems are just presenting a smoke screen to not approve of Kavanaugh. Unfortunately, IMHO, abortion is going nowhere even when the decision gets overturned…
5 years ago
No, the media buzz was not Kavanaugh. It was for just about everyone else right up to announcement.
