By Thomas Jipping | The Daily Signal
A poll at the 2014 midterm election found that only 4 percent of Americans believe that politicians keep their promises. Not a pretty picture.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is out to show us that he’s one politician who can keep a promise. On July 9, within minutes of President Donald Trump’s announcement of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as his Supreme Court nominee, Schumer vowed to “oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything I have.” When he said everything, he meant it.
U.S. Supreme Court
I can’t prove it, but if I were a betting man, I would wager that Schumer’s statement was written ahead of time, leaving a blank for the nominee’s name. Other Senate liberals, such as Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, actually announced their opposition nearly two weeks earlier, without even knowing who the nominee would be.
Nothing that the confirmation process had to offer was relevant to these senators because they already had the one piece of information, the one word, that really mattered: Trump. They would oppose the nominee because he or she would be Trump’s nominee. Period.
It was more than strange that senators who long before had made up their minds against Kavanaugh would complain that they needed more time to review more information about him. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said he had thoroughly reviewed Kavanaugh’s record when he announced his opposition in early July yet tried to postpone the hearing so he could review Kavanaugh’s record.
In 2009, Schumer said that a judicial record is the “best way to evaluate a nominee” and even more important than the confirmation hearing. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., agreed that “looking at what kind of judge a nominee has been means we do not have to speculate about what kind of a justice” he will be. Neither one of them is interested in Kavanaugh’s judicial record today.
In fact, Democrats did not even try to debate the most important thing about a judicial nominee, namely, the kind of judge he or she will be. They made no attempt to explain why they oppose the kind of judge that Kavanaugh has been or the kind of justice he will be.
Schumer and Leahy have said that the American Bar Association’s rating is the “gold standard” for evaluating nominees. The ABA unanimously rated Kavanaugh well qualified, which means, the ABA explains, that he meets “the very highest standards of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.” That no longer matters either.
No, the only thing that matters to liberals is preventing Trump’s nominee from joining the Supreme Court. To pursue that political goal, Senate Democrats picked up the script from the beginning of the previous Republican presidency. Within days of President George W. Bush taking office in 2001, Democratic Leader Tom Daschle vowed to use “whatever means necessary” to defeat his judicial nominees.
That’s what Democrats are doing today, by any means necessary. They automatically credit an accusation even though every person the accuser names denies any knowledge of it. Democrats demand a new hearing for an accuser who cannot identify the time or the place of an alleged incident. They refuse to share with the rest of the Judiciary Committee what they claim is evidence against Kavanaugh.
And, when The New Yorker traffics in what it admits is an unsubstantiated rumor, the hit piece’s author says the accuser came forward because “Democrats came looking” for someone to say such things.
Partisan double standards, ignoring what really matters, smears, turning basic notions of fairness on their head—that is what it means to use “whatever means necessary.” Schumer is keeping his promise of opposing Kavanaugh with everything he has. It won’t be enough.
Thomas Jipping is deputy director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation.
If by taking the gutter route, the Dems win the day a travesty has occurred and one of the real villains in this whole tawdry episode is Feinstein. She started it and thus far does’nt have a mark on her. Further, Shumer and his associates are beyond disgusting!!
The Democrats have ruined the lives of both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford. I, too, believe that she probably had some traumatic event in high school, but scientific literature has shown that repressed memories being revealed under therapy are less than 50% reliable in details. It is quite probable that the perpetrators are different.
Thinking about the Tawana Brawley false accusations of rape and subsequent trials, I would like to see a post-confirmation FBI investigation to, under the unlikely that these accusations are true, give grounds for impeachment, or – more likely – to give Judge Kavanaugh the evidence (or lack thereof) to sue the women and their supporters for liable.
This is a complete travesty, It just goes to show how low the DemocRATS are willing to go, they will do and say anything in order to” stop” Presidents Trumps nominee from being confirmed if another “conservative” gets on the bench, their dreams will be shattered, kind of like when Hillary Clinton lost …. they can’t let this happen at any cost.
Now the DemocRATS have a few more “Proud” DemocRATS willing to fall on the sword for the party. Yes, They may have been there but cannot remember or there were lots of drunken parties but not sure if Kavanaugh was there, more BS from the left.
I assume that Dr. Ford may have had some sort of “sexual encounter” when she was drunk at the age of “Fifteen” but she cannot say when or where only who (wow) give me a break. Mind games to bad the DemocRATS have lost there’s, I hope all the American people see through this charade. They are hoping to delay until November when they may have control !!