Skip to comments.New Bestseller Reveals Liberal Women Carried the Day for Kavanaugh
Posted on 07/13/2019 2:51:57 AM PDT by Kaslin
Pundits credit different events for turning the tide on now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s contentious Supreme Court confirmation. Some point to Kavanaugh’s impassioned testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Still others say it was Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) fiery speech, in which he lambasted his Democratic judiciary committee colleagues for withholding the allegations against Kavanaugh and then leaking those allegations at the most politically opportune time for Senate liberals.
As Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino detail in their just released bestselling book, Justice on Trial, Democrats might have succeeded in derailing Kavanaugh’s nomination if it weren’t for the courageous women who bucked the progressive groupthink and stood true to their moral compass—namely Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), traditionally more moderate and left-of-center than her Republican peers, and registered Democrat Leland Keyser, a childhood friend of Kavanaugh accuser Professor Christine Blasey Ford.
“I think [Sen.] Collins … did more to expose the ugliness of the controversy around the Kavanaugh [nomination] process than any other senator,” then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) tweeted after Sen. Collins delivered a 43-minute statement explaining her rationale for voting to confirm to the Supreme Court now-Justice Kavanaugh. “I commend [Sen.] Collins for her thoughtfulness [and] am proud to have her support for such a well[-]qualified nominee.”
Sen. Collins’ speech covered a lot of ground and systematically addressed the allegations against the judicial nominee, his credentials and first-hand analysis of the longtime litigator and judge, including commentary from Lisa Blatt, an abortion proponent and former clerk to left-leaning Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“Lisa Blatt, who has argued more cases before the Supreme Court than any other woman in history, testified, ‘By any objective measure, Judge Kavanaugh is clearly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. His opinions are invariably thoughtful and fair,’” said Collins. “[Blatt] also observed that Judge Kavanaugh is remarkably committed to promoting women in the legal profession.”
Indeed, Kavanaugh is ahead of the times and his peers when it comes to putting women on his payroll. As Erin Hawley, associate professor of law at the University of Missouri and a former clerk to Chief Justice John Roberts, said in a Chicago Sun-Times column ahead of Kavanaugh’s confirmation, he “has hired more women as law clerks than men. Eighty-four percent of those women have gone on to clerk at the Supreme Court. And he is the only D.C. Circuit judge to have ever hired four women in the same year for a clerkship.&rdquo
It was Blasey Ford’s word against Kavanaugh’s, and our American tradition of “innocent until proven guilty” reigned victorious in the end thanks to Keyser’s statement—and thanks to Sen. Collins who, in good conscience, couldn’t torpedo the confirmation of a man with an otherwise outstanding reputation based on toothless allegations that a “reasonable prosecutor” wouldn’t even bring before the committee.
Likewise, as Justice on Trial reveals: despite being Ford's friend, despite her desire not to see Kavanaugh on the court, and despite being pressured to lie in order to sink his nomination, Keyser's integrity won out.
As Sen. Collins said, “That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness.”
I'm sure Jeffrey Epstein feels that way, too, as howling mobs of Freepers demand his head on a plate for alleged crimes that took place 14-17 years ago, and every victim-witness has a financial interest in “proving” his guilt.
Actually, Epstein has accepted a guilty plea in the past and has served time.
I bought my mom the book yesterday afternoon. She woke up this morning, hours earlier than normal, just to continue reading it. She cannot put it down.
It matters little. Kavenaugh is compromised now. That whole spectacle was a clear message to him: we can destroy you whenever we want. We hold the power, not you. When we tell you to go for a homosexual decision, or an illegal alien decision, you better do it, because we own you. Thus is justice perverted by the Demonrats and Deep State.
Re: Actually, Epstein has accepted a guilty plea in the past and has served time.
In 2008, a Florida state Grand Jury returned exactly one criminal charge against Epstein, even though 40 women eventually demanded and received civil compensation from Epstein.
In 2008, U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta and his entire prosecution team concluded there was insufficient evidence to charge Epstein with any federal crimes.
The new charges against Epstein took place in the 2002-2005 time period.
The primary witnesses against Epstein are his former assistants.
The FBI-DOJ are running their usual legal scam - “Either your boss goes to jail, or you go to jail.”
Gosh, I wonder what they are going to say when they testify?
It’s entirely possible that Jeffrey Epstein is a total scumbag.
But if Jeffrey Epstein can be denied the presumption of innocence, the same thing can happen to you and me.
Sorry, but the Kvannaugh fiasco was built on the other collaboration with that Mrs Red against Roy Moore. Had the GOP stood firm , the democrats would have not smelled blood and took their chances
The presumption of innocence is not a social grace, it's a legal one.
You're making the same mistake lefties make about equality. I have no obligation to treat you equally except when it comes to enforcing the law for or against you.
I can and should presume his innocence or presume his guilt all I want in my daily life, which includes this forum. That's called free speech, free expression. It's healthy in a free republic. It's the law that can't presume his guilt, and civil proceedings that shouldn't, until proven otherwise.
Til now, I've said nothing of him, I don't care about him. You might consider being careful calling people howling mobs, when you yourself present merely as a self righteous bloviating individual virtue signaler, which I note makes you the member of a ... mob.
The GOPe wanted Moore out, so they had no desire to defend him.
Epstein is a registered sex offender. He has been convicted of sexual crimes. New allegations have resulted in new charges. He is currently being held under arrest and bail considered. He has pled not guilty to the current charges.
Yes, he should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The MSM has tried and convicted him in the court of public opinion.
And several of the rats on the committee feel justified in running for President?
Re: “which I note makes you the member of a ... mob.”
As far as I know, I am the only person at Free Republic who is defending the rule of law in regard to Jeffrey Epstein.
I have not received one supportive Comment on this issue, which, I guess, makes me the smallest mob in world history!
I agree. The tactic of coming up with decades old allegations for which no evidence exists is an old one. Unfortunately, it is also successful. In elections, the purpose is to introduce just enough doubt among the more morally conscious voters to get them to sit out the election, thereby giving the leftist the win. Never mind that the allegations are predictably forgotten once the leftist wins; so many fine candidates have been taken down in this fashion that baseless allegations will continue to be a campaign tool.
Luckily, the tactic is not as successful when it comes to confirming judges. Although, to be fair, I have to wonder, in Kavanaugh’s case, if the smear did not go too far in the other direction and cause the confirmation of a judge whose judicial temperament is a bit questionable. In Justice Thomas’ case, the confirmation was clearly correct; he demonstrates brilliance.
It is entirely appropriate to say Epstein is a pedophile sex offender. He pled guilty to it in 2007.
“Mr. Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges of soliciting a minor for prostitution. He registered as a sex offender, paid damages to victims and served 13 months in the Palm Beach County Stockade” https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/us/jeffrey-epstein-acosta-florida-sex-abuse.html
The virtual signalling mob are Rats. So of course your mob ain’t here.
I agree...I wish more people understood this concept.
We, the people, can form an opinion of guilt or innocence based on the information we have at the time. We have no obligation to wait for the "verdict".
It is my strong belief that Comey, Strozk, Page (Lisa), Brennen, Clapper, and the whole deep state cabal are guilty of numerous crimes, even though they haven't been charged.
Til now, I've said nothing of him, I don't care about him.
I agree, however, I will follow this case on a daily basis as it goes to the corruption in the justice system at the federal and state level. It also goes to the corruption in the MSM.
LOL! Good post.
“As far as I know, I am the only person at Free Republic who is defending the rule of law in regard to Jeffrey Epstein.”
Your inflated sense of self-importance is not serving you well. Name and quote one freeper that is advocating a short-circuit of the justice system to try and sentence Epstein. You won’t because you can’t. Just because people exercise free speech to state their belief that he’s guilty does not mean they are bypassing the rule of law.
So, apologies in advance, but I want to do a quick little THREAD to explain my theory of what the Epstein story really is. I promise this isn’t some crazy Pizzagate conspiracy about space lizards, just a neat little explanation that IMO perfectly fits the known facts (0/13):
(1/13) Let’s take as our starting points two givens.
(A.) You are a committed, unrepentant pedophile
(B.) Because of your old job in private banking, you are very connected to lots of very, very wealthy people
We’ll also assume a goal:
(Z.) You want to become very rich
(2/13) The obvious route is, well, obvious: you could just be a pimp, offering underage prostitute services to very rich people. This has two problems: you’re very disposable (see: DC madam), and it’s also not super lucrative. You can’t charge millions of dollars up front.
(3/13) The second level though follows instantly: You don’t need to charge up front, just get them to have underage sex, and then blackmail them afterwards for hush money. Better ROI, but you’re still a liability, and producing and receiving big bribe money raises big questions.
(4/13) So, what to do? Well, the second idea has some merits. First, you need to recruit people in. Have lots of massive parties at your spacious home (check), invite top academics, artists, politicians to encourage people to come (check), and supply lots of young women (check)
(5/13) You don’t even have to do anything, and most people invited might even be totally unaware of the real purpose of the parties! But, sooner or later, some billionaire will get handsy, she’ll escort him to a room with a hidden camera, things happen. Morning after, you strike.
(6/13) You inform him she was really 15, but you offer him a nice, neat way to buy your silence: a large allocation to your hedge fund, which charges 2/20 (check). To ensure nobody else asks questions, you also take the extraordinary step of demanding power of attorney (check)
More at above link..
The fact that Epsteins fund is offshore in a tax haven it is based in the U.S. Virgin Islands and has a secret client list both add credence to the blackmail theory.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.