Kavanaugh inquiry seems like a political sham

Both Democrats and Republicans have dragged the Supreme Court nomination process down into a debacle, and the rushed and hobbled FBI inquiry has just added to a spectacle that should be an embarrassment to the United States.

It looks like the limited inquiry has just initiated more controversy, which is hardly surprising given how rushed it was.

Fox News: White House receives FBI report on Kavanaugh, ‘fully confident’ he’ll be confirmed

The White House on Thursday announced that it has received the FBI’s supplemental background investigation into President Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh, and is “fully confident” that he will eventually be confirmed to the Supreme Court.

The FBI was tasked by Trump last week to look into allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against Kavanaugh by three women. The investigation commenced after Dr. Christine Blasey Ford — the first woman to come forward — testified before the Senate Judiciary last week about her claims against the federal judge.

Raj Shah, the principal deputy press secretary for the White House, said the FBI report is currently “being transmitted to the Senate.”

“With [Senate Majority] Leader [Mitch] McConnell’s cloture filing, Senators have been given ample time to review this seventh background investigation,” Shah said in a statement posted to Twitter.

‘Ample time’ is a joke.

“This is the last addition to the most comprehensive review of a Supreme Court nominee in history, which includes extensive hearings, multiple committee interviews, over 1,200 questions for the record and over a half million pages of documents.”

Shah said the “White House is fully confident” Kavanaugh will be confirmed to the Supreme Court in the Senate vote.

Fox News: Grassley says new FBI report backs Kavanaugh, urges Senate to send him to high court

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, declared earlier Thursday that nothing in the document changed his mind, and that it was time to vote to confirm Kavanaugh.

“I’ve now received a committee staff briefing on the FBI’s supplement to Judge Kavanaugh’s background investigation file,” Grassley said Thursday. “There’s nothing in it that we didn’t already know. These uncorroborated accusations have been unequivocally and repeatedly rejected by Judge Kavanaugh, and neither the Judiciary Committee nor the FBI could locate any third parties who can attest to any of the allegations.

Republican swing senators on the Brett Kavanaugh nomination indicated Thursday they were satisfied with the FBI’s investigation into sexual assault allegations against the Supreme Court pick, stirring speculation they could back the embattled judge in the end.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who has stayed mum on her Kavanaugh stance, said Thursday that the bureau’s supplemental background probe “appears to be a very thorough investigation.”

And Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who originally requested the FBI re-open its investigation into the claims leveled against Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford, agreed.

“No new corroborative information came out of it,” Flake said on Capitol Hill Thursday. “Thus far, we’ve see no new credible corroboration—no new corroboration at all.”

But Flake continued to keep the public guessing, returning to view the report again saying he has “more reading” to do. He pulled a surprise last week when he publicly backed Kavanaugh, and then demanded the FBI probe before a final vote.

Meanwhile, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who also is considered a swing vote, was going to view the document Thursday afternoon. “I’m going to read it myself,” Murkowski said on her way to read the report for the first time. “I’m gonna go in with my eyes to it.”

But Fox News: Ford’s lawyers slam FBI investigation after McConnell signals Kavanaugh vote later this week

Attorneys for Dr. Christine Blasey Ford late Wednesday slammed the FBI background investigation into President Trump’s Supreme Court pick, Brett Kavanaugh, after it was revealed that the agency’s probe appears to be over.

“An FBI supplemental background investigation that did not include an interview of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford– nor the witnesses who corroborate her testimony– cannot be called an investigation,” the statement read. “We are profoundly disappointed that after the tremendous sacrifice she made in coming forward, those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth.”

Sources previously told Fox News that Senators and some aides would be able to start looking at the FBI’s background investigation on Thursday morning and that Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and committee member Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., would be given the first chance to look at the report.

It sounds like conclusions have been reached before most people have had a chance to read the report.

Business Insider: ‘Our fears have been realised’: Democrats slam FBI investigation into Kavanaugh

  • Senate Democrats condemned the FBI investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, calling it “incomplete.”
  • Democrats have accused the White House of limiting the probe, and they point to the fact that the FBI didn’t interview either Kavanaugh or his most prominent accuser, professor Christine Blasey Ford.

Senate Democrats condemned the FBI investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, arguing that the probe was limited by the White House and plagued by a lack of transparency.

After being briefed on the report, of which only one hard copy has been made available to senators under time limits and intense security, Democratic leadership called the probe “incomplete” and pushed for Republicans to release a redacted version of it and of the White House’s directive to the FBI instructing the law enforcement agency on how to conduct the investigation.

“We had many fears that this was a very limited process that would constrain the FBI from getting all the facts,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said during a brief press conference on Thursday morning. “Having received a thorough briefing on the documents, those fears have been realised.”

Schumer said that he disagrees with Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley’s description of the report as containing “no hint of misconduct.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, called the report “a product of an incomplete investigation” and accused the White House of blocking the FBI from “doing its job.”

“The most notable part of this report is what’s not in it,” she said during the press conference.

Democratic lawmakers were given one hour on Thursday morning to view the report in a secure room in the Senate.

A rushed inquiry and rushed reading are very poor ways of dealing with such an important nomination.

Fox News: GOP senator said he urged Trump to pick someone other than Kavanaugh

During a passionate speech to his Senate colleagues, Republican Sen. Ben Sasse told lawmakers he “urged” President Trump earlier this summer to consider choosing another Supreme Court nominee after discovering Judge Brett Kavanaugh was his top pick.

Speaking about the #MeToo movement and the rancorous debate over Kavanaugh’s confirmation and the sexual assault allegations against him, Sasse said on the Senate floor Wednesday he asked Trump to “make a different choice” for the nation’s highest court as early as June. He also sharply rebuked the president for mocking Dr. Christine Blasey Ford — the woman who accused the federal judge of sexual misconduct more than 30 years ago.

Sasse, from Nebraska, didn’t reveal who he asked Trump to nominate but did hint it was a woman. Amy Coney Barrett and Joan Larsen were considered on the short list for Trump’s consideration.

“Part of my argument then was that the very important #MeToo movement was also very new and this Senate is not at all well prepared to handle potential allegations of sexual harassment and assault that might have come forward,” Sasse said, adding his warning “was absent of knowing a particular nominee.”

The inquiry may may now lead the way to a vote for the appointment of Kavanaugh, but it is unlikely to calm the controversy down.

There have been a number of reports like this from the New Yorker: The F.B.I. Probe Ignored Testimonies from Former Classmates of Kavanaugh

Frustrated potential witnesses who have been unable to speak with the F.B.I. agents conducting the investigation into sexual-assault allegations against Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, have been resorting to sending statements, unsolicited, to the Bureau and to senators, in hopes that they would be seen before the inquiry concluded.

NBC News reported that dozens of people who said that they had information about Kavanaugh had contacted F.B.I. field offices, but agents had not been permitted to talk to many of them. Several people interested in speaking to the F.B.I. expressed exasperation in interviews with The New Yorker at what they perceived to be a lack of interest in their accounts.

The FBI did not interview either Kavanaugh himself, nor Christine Blasey Ford.

I’ve just heard a very slanted speech by Mitch McConnell who lauded Kavanaugh and slammed accusers. He said that the FBI couldn’t find any corroborating witnesses, but there have been a number of claims from people that they were ignored by the FBI.

This nomination is a mess that reflects very poorly on politics and justice in the US.

One thing seems sure – this will do nothing to calm the controversy down.



  1. chrism56

     /  October 5, 2018

    Why should the FBI interview the accuser to see what her accusations meant? She gave sworn statements and testimony in the Committee and named witnesses. The FBI should go and talk to those witnesses. See if there is any evidence other than just peoples accusations. Word is their wasn’t.
    Trump might be despicable, but that doesn’t mean he was wrong to characterise her stance as she doesn’t know when or where it happened, told no one for thirty years when she “recovered” her memories, but won’t release the doctor’s notes, gave false evidence (flying fear, door building and lie detector tests) but knows it was the Judge.

    • chrism56

       /  October 5, 2018

      The investigation was supposed to be about the sex abuse. The accusations that he was an angry teenage drunk only came out after the wheels started falling off the original complaints.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  October 5, 2018

      The door thing is true, but it has been given a back-story from the sound of it and was not done for the reason she quoted. She lived for a long time in a 50sm flat with only one door.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  October 5, 2018

        If white male privilege exists, why are there any poor white men doing menial jobs ? Why are only men legally obliged to join the army ? And so on.

        If only white men were rich and in the best jobs, I might believe in this concept.

  2. David

     /  October 5, 2018

    So the Dems spend weeks screaming for an investigation, the 7th one, and one is agreed on terms approved by both sides and the White House, the FBI unhindered do one and come back early because there is no corroborating evidence and all the witnesses the “victims” named say they think the accusers are wrong.
    Given this has been investigated up the wazzoo by the committee who have their own investigators, there have been sworn statements from friends debunking pretty much most of the claims what exactly did anyone expect…I tell you what we expected claims of sham investigation and predictably it happens.
    Step away from it being a Trump appointment and you have a Judge who no one has any questions at all about his time on the bench. He has led a pretty much exemplary life, he seems like a great father, great husband has had no complaints from anyone who has worked with him in 30 years.
    Schummer said he would oppose Kavanaugh with everything he had within minutes of the nomination, many Dems are looking at a 2020 run, Feinstein is in danger from her far left and this guy is collateral damage..its been disgraceful.

    • Gezza

       /  October 5, 2018

      I reckon you worry too much about this. Al Jaz tv showed Diane Feinstein and she reckons the FBI was hobbled, maybe by the White House. But who cares? What’s it got to do with us? It’s the US Supreme Court. Who gives a damn here?

      • Corky

         /  October 5, 2018

        Many of us, it would seem, Geeza. This is a Left and Right fight. Something that will be fought here in 2020..and it will be just as nasty. At the moment after seeing Simon on Jono and Ben( what fugwit goes on a show with these hosers?), I must say my supreme confidence in National sleep walking to power is dimming.

        Conversely, in the States, interest in the mid terms is at an all time high. That, in my opinion, can only benefit President Trumpy.

        God bless President Trumpy and the National Party.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  October 5, 2018

          The chance of any party sleepwalking into power is zero. Having supporters who don’t vote for their party doesn’t help, either.

  3. Blazer

     /  October 5, 2018

  4. Patzcuaro

     /  October 5, 2018
  5. Patzcuaro

     /  October 5, 2018
  6. Joe Bloggs

     /  October 5, 2018

    the investigation was only on the topic of sexual abuse, and only related to the names raised in congressional testimony. No investigation of the lies Kavanaugh told while under oath.

    the FBI was denied access to the accuser and the accused and was denied access to former classmates of both

    the FBI was denied access to corroborating witnesses of the 2nd accuser Debbie Ramirez

    100 senators are given 24 hours to read one copy of a thousand page document

    the senators are required to view the document in SCIF and are prohibited by the WH, Grassley+McConnell from discussing its contents.

    It is a pitiful sham. Justice Perjurer it is then…. and watch the assembled morons cheer.

    And comes now this hopeless, vicious buffoon, and the audience of equally hopeless and vicious buffoons who laughed and cheered when he made sport of a woman whose lasting memory of the trauma she suffered is the laughter of the perpetrators.

    Now he comes, a man swathed in scandal, with no interest beyond what he can put in his pocket and what he can put over on a universe of suckers, and he does something like this while occupying an office that we gave him, and while endowed with a public trust that he dishonors every day he wakes up in the White House.

    The scion of a multigenerational criminal enterprise, the parameters of which we are only now beginning to comprehend. A vessel for all the worst elements of the American condition. And a cheap, soulless bully besides

    Watch him again, behind the seal of the President of the United States. Isn’t he a funny man? Isn’t what happened to that lady hilarious? Watch the assembled morons cheer. This is the only story now.

    – Charles Pierce

    • Corky

       /  October 5, 2018

      Apologies Joe. I thought you were a man. Usually women are called ”Jo.”

    • High Flying Duck

       /  October 5, 2018

      There is no doubt Kavanaugh minimised his drinking while 17 years old in the face of “gotcha” questioning from the Democrats on the panel. He really had no choice. Although it is often missed that he did say he sometimes had too many beers when he drank – an admission he got too drunk at times.

      To imply this is disqualifying is simply absurd.

      Have a look at the quillette article below and see if you can still be so certain this guy is a predator.

    • Pink David

       /  October 5, 2018

      “No investigation of the lies Kavanaugh told while under oath.”

      Is Ford going to be investigated for the lies she told while under oath Joe?


      I’m loving the standard of evidence that is now acceptable. Bloke claims someone once told him something, said person deny’s this, but this is now comprehensive confirmation of an act. Just think what you can do with that.

      • Blazer

         /  October 5, 2018

        there should be a job down here for Kavanaugh at Russell McVeagh Bartleet and McKenzie…Nz’s foreskin law firm.

  7. High Flying Duck

     /  October 5, 2018

    For those who argued that eye witness innacuracies apply to witnesses, not victims:

    (it is in the Federalist, which is RW but mostly accurate & has citations):

    “In 1975, a young woman was brutally raped in her home while she was watching TV. Shortly thereafter, she identified her assailant as Dr. Donald Thomson. On the basis of her compelling and apparently credible testimony, Thomson was arrested and charged despite having an irrefutable alibi.

    In an ironic and exculpatory turn of events, authorities discovered that, prior to the attack, the woman had been watching Thomson on live TV discussing the inaccuracies of eye-witness testimony and simply confused his face with that of her rapist’s. As bizarre as this incident may appear, false memories in concert with compelling but false testimony is often the rule rather than the exception.

    For example, the failure of memory and recall contributed to the wrongful criminal convictions of 75 percent of the first 250 cases in which DNA evidence exonerated the incarcerated individuals. In 2015, the National Academy of Sciences released a report summarizing decades of rigorous evidence demonstrating that common cognitive processes lead us to “recall things we never experienced.”


    • High Flying Duck

       /  October 5, 2018

      From the article:

      Flashbulb Memories

      A flashbulb memory is a memory encoded in a time of intense psychological stress that is supposedly extraordinarily vivid and accurate, like a snapshot illuminated by the light of a camera’s flash. While not mentioned by name, this is the type of memory to which psychiatrist Richard Friedman is referring in his New York Times article, “Why Sexual Assault Memories Stick.” Interestingly, he cites only one study—which involves participants reading an “emotionally arousing short story”—to back up his claim that trauma leads to memories that are “indelible.”

      This claim runs in direct contradiction to the majority of research on flashbulb memories. As researchers McCloskey, Wible, and Cohen have noted, flashbulb memories use the same neural mechanisms, decay at the same rate, and are no more nor less accurate than typical memories overall. The only notable difference seems to be the confidence with which people speak about their flashbulb memories.

      However, not all researchers agree that flashbulb memories operate via the same neural mechanisms as typical memories, nor do they all agree that they are so similar in accuracy. In fact, many researchers argue that flashbulb memories are less accurate.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  October 5, 2018

        It’s been proved over and over that people ‘remember’ things that didn’t happen.

        My mother ‘remembered’ seeing a ship sinking when she was a child, but she couldn’t have seen it in reality, only a film of it. But she was convinced that she had seen it actually happening and wasn’t a person who was gullible or fanciful about that sort of thing.

  8. High Flying Duck

     /  October 5, 2018

    Ex FBI people interviewed all said 1 week was plenty of time for the investigation. This included people like James Comey, who can’t stand Trump. The FBI have more or less infirnite resource and can get things done very quickly.

    • Blazer

       /  October 5, 2018

      dark humour there …Duck.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  October 5, 2018

        The Dems seem to think the FBI are working for Trump now – how much difference a week makes eh?

  9. duperez

     /  October 5, 2018

    “We are in a political environment in which there are no rules, no norms anymore to violate. There is only power, and the individual judgments of individual senators—facing whatever political pressures they face, calculating political gain however they do it, and consulting their consciences to the extent they have them.”

    Benjamin Wittes: Editor in chief of Lawfare and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution


  10. The Consultant

     /  October 5, 2018

    Ann Althouse is a law professor in Lefty enclave, Madison, Wisconsin. Voted for Obama twice, 60’s survivor… I should not have to preface all that but when dealing with people like “Joe Bloggs”, “Blazer”, and the like. But haters gotta be haters. And all this counts here in NZ when you realise the same mentality exists and the same attitudes will be brought to bear, along with all the intersectionality victim status vs “the oppressors”.

    So I thought this comment from one of her regular readers, hit the nail on the head:

    It’s not a bug, it’s a feature! Basically this entire process has been designed from the get go as a Kafka trap:

    1) Hey, there are some terrible accusations and if you don’t withdraw, they are going to come out and it’s going to be embarrassing for you and your family. You should withdraw.

    2) Okay, you deny the accusations and aren’t withdrawing? Well we’re going to draw this out so that all the crazies can come out of the woodwork and accuse you of being a closet horrific criminal. Don’t make us have a hearing – you don’t want that.

    3) Okay, you’re going to cause us to have a hearing? We’re going to make sure the salaciousness of every accusation is stretched out in loving detail on TV.

    4) Oh, this makes you angry? Well that’s clearly a sign that you lack the temperament to be on the court.

    5) You point out how partisan this has been? Clearly you’re not going to be a fair umpire on the court. We, who were never going to vote for your confirmation anyway, are shocked that any potential justice would consider these obviously partisan attacks as partisan.

    6) Does this process make you angry bro? Well, by the way you’re acting, it’s possible to see that this has damaged your mind and you’re probably no longer fit to be on the court.

    7) Oh, you got confirmed anyway? Nearly half the country is going to think of you as a rapist for the rest of your life. It’ll be mentioned in every biography ever written about you and will be one of the only thing that anyone remembers about you in the future.

    I cannot wait to see who wants to go through this process in the future. And boy, howdy, I cannot wait for the next time a Democratic president tries to get someone confirmed. It’s gonna be lit!


    • High Flying Duck

       /  October 5, 2018

      Kafka is right – except this time there are accusations, but no-one is on trial.

      • Blazer

         /  October 5, 2018

        thats right and you personally are very sympathetic to ‘plausible deniability’…when it suits…naturlich.

        • High Flying Duck

           /  October 5, 2018

          I’m sympathetic to innocent until proven guilty – or at least until any actual evidence emerges to remotely suggest guilt.
          You prefer guilty because Republicans?

        • The Consultant

           /  October 5, 2018

          And deniability doesn’t get more plausible than having no witnesses, no evidence and a “memory” that has shifted quite radically on even the rough date of the attack, – in just a few months.

          And then there’s the Democrats:
          – Keith Ellison (2iC of the Democrat Party): “Official report says the allegations are “unsubstantiated”. The “report” actually contains a bucketload of evidence that rather contradicts the gaslighting summary, which is why Keith may be about to stand down from that position. But he’s still running for the position of Attorney General in Minnesota. Yes – Attorney General.

          Democrat State Senator Jeff Woodburn

          “Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony was detailed, emotional and credible. I believe her. ‪#BelieveSurvivors‪,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen said in a tweet after Ford testified. “Thank you, Dr. Ford. Your bravery and poise as you told your story have touched millions across this country. I hear you and I believe you,” tweeted Sen. Maggie Hassan.

          Democratic candidate for Governor Molly Kelly didn’t even wait for Dr. Ford to testify: “Even before we heard Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s courageous testimony, I believed her,” Kelly said. “I believe women. I will listen to women. And I will stand with women every single day as Governor.”

          But when photos were released Tuesday of the bite marks left by their fellow Democrat State Senator Jeff Woodburn in an assault on his partner right here in New Hampshire, these same politicians said…nothing.

          Bite marks??? The photos are awful (that’s “evidence” by the way). Looks like the US Left have learned nothing from the Ted Kennedy/Bill Clinton era.

          When making accusations and tearful pleas of support, it’s probably smart to not be a hypocrite. Just a suggestion.

          Oh – and avoid Labour Party Youth Camps! The NZ Left has learned nothing either.

  11. High Flying Duck

     /  October 5, 2018

  12. High Flying Duck

     /  October 5, 2018

    • The Consultant

       /  October 5, 2018

      Ooooo – you’ve got cartoons that say “Trumpy horrible man” – which is really what this is about and has always been about. #Resistance.

      Still, I love the implication that Trump now has control of the FBI’s crime investigations. Bet he wishes that were so.

      Trust the FBI! The FBI is the expert authority! Bring in the FBI! FBI!! FBI!!………… The FBI did it wrong!

      They cried out over and over for the FBI. The FBI was called in because it was supposedly neutral and expert and the proper authority. Then, when they didn’t like what they got, they immediately flipped to saying the FBI didn’t do it right.

      Shorter Patzcuaro: “The game’s not over until we win!”

      • Blazer

         /  October 5, 2018

        yes Trump is very presidential.Carries himself with the honour,dignity and integrity expected of that office.

        • The Consultant

           /  October 5, 2018

          Shorter Blazer: “I got nuthin”

          • Blazer

             /  October 5, 2018

            don’t really care about U.S politics…surprised how passionate some are regarding it.

            • The Consultant

               /  October 5, 2018


              Sure, sure.

              How many comments on this thread? Nine? Admittedly all cartoons with no thought or argument but it must have taken time to track those down. Not to mention your ubiquitous presence the other Kavanaugh threads, and general US stuff.

              But yeah: you really don’t care.

            • Blazer

               /  October 5, 2018

              no I don’t…the cartoons are lined up if you know where to look.
              Very rarely bother with Trump threads.

  13. Pink David

     /  October 5, 2018

    “Kavanaugh inquiry seems like a political sham”

    Makes sense. The accusation was a political sham, so I don’t see why the correct response should be any thing less.

  14. The Consultant

     /  October 5, 2018

    If you look closely you can see Blazer, Patzcuaro and Joe Bloggs in the foreground arguing.

    I think Patzcuaro’s the one who was turned into a newt – but got better. He’s also the smartest since he figured out that wood floats and the rest just flows logically.

  15. High Flying Duck

     /  October 5, 2018

    Another statement Kavanaugh made at the hearing about “Devil’s Triangle” is cleared up”

    People thinking the current Urban Dictionary definition reflects the schoolboys version in the in early 1980’s.

    Either that or they knew this would be an issue 35 years from then so made sure the YB would clear it up!

  16. Alan Wilkinson

     /  October 5, 2018

    The sound of Lefties squealing like stuck pigs is music to my ears. Can’t wait till the next one rolls up to the Supreme Court and gets dealt to.

  17. The Consultant

     /  October 5, 2018

    Did someone say squealing…???. Trump approval:
    overall – 50%
    black voters – 35%.

    Maybe African Americans don’t like the look of Democrat lynch mobs enraged by false accusations. #Emmett Till. 🙂

  18. Kitty Catkin

     /  October 5, 2018

    How can any otherwise intelligent person believe that this woman is NOT a liar ? Or that accusers are ‘survivors’ and that women must always be believed ?

    Two of the worst liars I have ever met were women. One despicably claimed to be the mother (later changed to grandmother when it emerged that it was (Marty ?) Palmer the son and not the father who had died at Pike River…she lapped up all the sympathy and admiration for her courage when she went ahead as Matron of (dis)Honour to her (also a liar) friend who had snared a dear friend of ours. The brave woman wouldn’t let her friend down and carried on with a breaking heart (the blushing bride was in on the lie, of course)

    Too bad for them that the real Palmer mother/grandmother was interviewed on the news.

    Declaring that women MUST be believed is reducing us to the level of children who are too stupid to lie. We have all been lied to, I imagine !