Kavanaugh proves he's no jurist, but a partisan hack
Brett M. Kavanaugh proved himself unfit to serve on the Supreme Court.
It has little to do with his treatment of women.
Kavanaughs freshman-year roommate at Yale had told The New Yorker that the future Supreme Court nominee could become aggressive and belligerent when drunk. But, as millions have now seen with their own eyes, he is aggressive and belligerent when stone-cold sober.
His testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday was a howl of partisan rage. He said the behavior of Democrats on the committee was an embarrassment and a good old-fashioned attempt at Borking. He said they were lying in wait with false, last-minute smears.
The proceedings were, he said, a national disgrace, a circus, a grotesque and coordinated character assassination and a search and destroy mission. He blamed Democrats for threats against his family, to blow me up and take me down.
This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, he said,
revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.
Kavanaugh shouted and scowled, sniffed and wept, turned the pages of his text as if swatting insects and thumped the witness table. Gone was the nominee who two weeks ago preached judicial modesty. Gone was the man who on Monday spoke to Fox News about fairness and integrity and dignity and respect.
On Thursday afternoon, after his main accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, gave such compelling testimony that even Republican senators described her favorably, Kavanaugh ripped off the mask or the robe, as it were and revealed himself to be the man he was when, as a lieutenant to Kenneth Starr in the 1990s, he proposed to hit President Bill Clinton with a sexually vulgar line of questioning.
https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/milbank-kavanaugh-proves-hes-no-jurist-but-a-partisan-hack/?utm_source=DAILY+HERALD&utm_campaign=3000ab877e-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d81d073bb4-3000ab877e-228635337
dlk
(11,566 posts)Hes far too temperamental and emotional to sit on any court, let alone the Supreme Court. Its difficult to visualize him ever being a dispassionate and even-tempered arbiter of the facts, the most basic requirement for a Supreme Court justice.
demigoddess
(6,641 posts)I ought to know. One parent was a mean drunk, Dad was a nice drunk. That's the way they were sober also.