Tag: Brett Kavanaugh

Member Post


The latest word is that Senator Grassley’s office has either (a) not been able to reach Christine Blasey Ford or her attorneys to confirm her willingness to testify, or (b) they’ve been able to reach her, but she and her legal team are asking for various, undisclosed conditions on her appearance. Given what she has […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post


Brett Kavanaugh…on the whole, he’s a pretty unobjectionable, milquetoast character that should be the best-case scenario judge for Progressives who literally have no power over the Supreme Court nomination process at this time. Yet…and hold tight because this sentence is a statement and a half unto itself…Dianne Feinstein has chosen to eleventh-hour grandstand with an […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Me and Brett and the Aliens


It happened sometime during the summer of 1997. My recollection of the events is a little bit fuzzy because the memory itself is now old enough to buy a drink, and I never bothered to write it down … besides, who would write something like this down? It might prove embarrassing later.

At any rate, that was the summer between my high school graduation and starting college, and I was working as an intern in the lab at my father’s office. My folks had left for the week on a trip and taken my younger sister with them, so I was watching the house by myself. After I got home that night (again, I can’t recall if it was a Monday … but whatever) I went about my business of sorting out the animals and fixing some food. That’s when I got an unexpected knock on our door.

Member Post


Due to the Golden State’s “top-two” jungle primary scheme, California voters will only be able to pick between a pair of Democrats for U.S. Senate on their General Election ballot — namely, five-term incumbent Dianne Feinstein or hard-Left state senator Kevin de León. All things being equal for conservatives and the California GOP, re-electing Feinstein […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Kavanaugh in the #MeToo Era


In the wake of the revelation of Christine Blasey Ford’s identity, some have suggested that her allegation against Brett Kavanaugh will be handled more sensitively than such accusations once were thanks to the #MeToo movement. That may turn out to be true, but only if at least one other woman comes forward with similar charges.

#MeToo gave courage to women, and some men, to speak up about sexual harassment and abuse. It helped to clarify that gross sexual misconduct is not a perk of power. It revived a sense of shame. Whereas for too long, many women felt powerless in the face of this abuse, the movement offered strength in numbers. Once one victim of a brutish man found her voice, others summoned the courage to come forward.

And there were always others. The high-profile men felled by #MeToo: Harvey Weinstein, John Conyers, Jr., Louis C.K., Charlie Rose, Mark Halperin, Bill O’Reilly, Kevin Spacey, Roger Ailes, and others faced accusations from multiple victims. That’s the way such men are. They’re predators. Few of the accused even denied the allegations.

#HimToo? Call Wavering Senators’ Bluff


If Sen. Flake, who the careful John Hinderaker now calls “traitor,” truly believes Judge Kavanaugh’s 11th -hour Democrat accuser, he will immediately call for the judge’s impeachment. If Flake and the abortion-on-demand supporters, Senators Collins and Murkowski, believe a word of the accusation against Judge Kavanaugh, if they even really believe the allegation is serious, then they will also immediately hold a press conference demanding the impeachment of Justice Clarence Thomas. They will do no such thing because they believe none of this.

As John Hinderaker explains:

“Traitor” is normally considered a harsh word, but it is the only printable thing I have called “Republican” Senator Jeff Flake since he announced, a few hours ago, that he is “not comfortable voting yes” on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. His concern is the ridiculously stale allegation by Democrat professor Christine Ford that Kavanaugh groped her and tried to kiss her at a party when they were both high school students more than 30 years ago. You might reasonably think this is a joke. Unfortunately not.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos tackle the latest accusations of Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh, leaving Republicans with the unpleasant choice of ditching a Supreme Court nominee over an eleventh hour allegation missing many specifics or confirming a nominee who many Americans now believe to be a sex offender just one month before the midterms. They also get a kick out Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez flailing and failing to explain how she would pay for $40 trillion in new government programs over ten years. And they sigh as evidence mounts that North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un hasn’t stopped his nuclear or missile programs but just isn’t boasting about it anymore.

Thoughts on Kavanaugh


When the anonymous accusation of sexual misconduct on the part of Brett Kavanaugh first came out, many people (myself included) stated that unless the accuser came out publicly the accusation should be completely ignored. Well, now the accuser has come forward. Christine Blasey Ford has publicly claimed that she was assaulted by Kavanaugh when they were both in High School 30+ years ago. This changes the situation and now the accusation must be dealt with.

That is not to say that the accusation has merit. Let me first state that if the claim is true, Kavanaugh should immediately recuse himself and resign from his current seat on the DC Court of Appeals. But is it true? On the one hand, we have the statement of Ford that it happened. She can’t say exactly when or exactly where. She only shared the story of what happened that night with anyone else a few years ago in 2012. The vague nature of her claim makes it hard for anyone to confirm or refute her statement. On the other hand, Kavanaugh has vigorously denied that any such incident ever happened, as has the one other person who supposedly witnessed the alleged assault. Over 65 women who also knew Judge Kavanaugh back in High School have come out in support of him.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss the allegation emerging now against Brett Kavanaugh but dating back to the 1980’s, and while the allegation is disturbing, they agree a lot more specifics need to come out before it can be taken credibly. They also applaud Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for blasting the rank partisanship that has become a hallmark of Supreme Court confirmation debates. And they slam the New York Times for clearly implying that UN Ambassador Nikki Haley ordered $52,000 curtains for her ambassadorial residence in New York City, when the same article makes it clear the spending decision was made in the Obama administration.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America get a kick out of Hillary Clinton trying to damage efforts to confirm Brett Kavanaugh by spreading a birth control lie that was thoroughly debunked days ago – even by liberals. They also recoil as an angry anti-Trump voter tries to stab a Republican congressional candidate in California and the mainstream media largely ignore the incident. And they blast MSNBC host Joe Scarborough for arguing, on 9/11, that President Trump is damaging the United States far more than any terrorist ever has or could.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud Politifact for not trying to explain away the birth control smear Sen. Kamala Harris aimed at Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and giving Harris “four Pinocchios.” They also cringe as a new batch of polls show President Trump’s approval taking a hit in recent weeks, because that may mean bad news in November for Republicans in competitive races. And they pause to remember the anguish of the terrorist attacks that happened on this date in 2001 and the resolve we still need to confront today’s threats.

A Shameful Political Display


You degrade, demean and insult the President. You’ve told us that his behavior is “shameful,” that he belittles and demeans, that he “got played,” by Vladimir Putin. Along with your colleagues you protest his actions toward international leaders, his petty tweets and how he is “troubling” and “irresponsible.”

Yes, I’m talking to you, Kamala Harris and Cory Booker.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America get a kick out of Missouri Rep. Billy Long drowning out a protester during a House committee hearing by drawing upon his old auctioneering skills. They also scratch their heads as an anonymous administration official writes an op-ed in the New York Times to explain how the Trump White House is in chaos and that many people are secretly thwarting Trump’s worst instincts, but they wonder why anyone would go public about secretly undermining the president. And they roll their eyes as Cory Booker invites punishment for releasing confidential materials connected to the Brett Kavanaugh hearings – and that was before we found out the documents were not actually confidential.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America sigh as Democrats repeatedly interrupt the start of the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings in a futile attempt to delay him from joining the court. They also give John Kerry credit for explaining how President Obama’s failure to enforce the red line over chemical weapons in Syria led to major diplomatic headaches. And they respond to calls for Meghan McCain to replace her father in the U.S. Senate by saying such seats are not family heirlooms and any family members who wants to serve should have to get elected.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America cheer up as they see new Senate polls showing Rick Scott with a healthy lead in Florida and Republicans within striking distance in Wisconsin. They also shake their heads as Sen. Elizabeth Warren issues perfunctory condolences to the family of Mollie Tibbetts but says we need to focus on our real immigration problems. And they marvel at Senate Democrats, who now insist that the consideration of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh must wait because Michael Cohen has accused President Trump of a campaign finance violation.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Chad Benson of Radio America watch in amusement as Democrats invent ridiculous arguments against Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, such as Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s (D-Conn) statement that President Donald Trump “would be a monarch if Brett Kavanaugh becomes a Supreme Court justice.” They also worry about America’s fertility rate falling to a 42-year low and the factors contributing to the decline, such as low marriage rates and the prevalence of birth control. And they are happy to see Netflix cancel the show of the Nation of Islam Leader Louis Farrakhan.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Rich McFadden of Radio America break down Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s request that red-state Democrats remain neutral on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. They also cannot believe that some Democrats are seriously considering the idea of almost doubling the federal budget to pay for Sen. Bernie Sander’s Medicare-for-all program. And they cannot find any examples of malfeasance in the Boston Globe story about the TSA’s passenger-monitoring program that tracks people who sweat too much and urinate too often.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are pleasantly stunned to see the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals uphold the right to carry a firearm in public. They also roll their eyes as New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker suggests supporting Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh makes one “complicit in evil.” And they slam President Trump for extending $12 billion in agricultural welfare to farmers who are getting hammered in Trump’s trade war.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America give credit to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for countering Democratic demands for a million pages of documents on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh by suggesting the Senate vote on him may come just days before the election. They also mourn the impending loss of many entry-level jobs at places like McDonald’s due to minimum wage hikes and technological advancements. And they roll their eyes at the NFL’s inability to enforce a policy on kneeling during the anthem just days after the Miami Dolphins threatened to suspend players for not standing.

Progressives Come After Brett Kavanaugh


Two different lines of attack have been launched against the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, now of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to replace Anthony Kennedy on the United States Supreme Court: one personal and one substantive. On the former I have little to say, except to note Yale Law School Professor Amy Chua’s glowing endorsement of Kavanaugh in the Wall Street Journal. Of far greater importance is the attack on his intellectual orientation, both generally and as it relates to specific issues that have come up already, and that will surely come up again before the Supreme Court.

On these issues, the progressive forces aligned against Kavanaugh have given no quarter. The chief object of their intellectual denunciation is the Federalist Society, with whom I have been actively involved since its formation in the early Reagan years. The great success of that organization, as the New York Times columnist David Brooks has recognized, is its single-minded devotion to a long game in which the study of first principles is the main object of intellectual inquiry. The basic insight is that every political movement needs strong intellectual foundations to insulate it from the passions of the day, and that the free exploration of ideas is the best way to achieve that end. The Federalist Society took off in the early 1980s precisely because the dominant liberal ethos of the time was so sure of its political and moral invincibility that it had not taken the time to develop its own comprehensive view on the fundamental relationship between the individual and the state.

Nothing much has changed since then. The utter absence of that foundational work is evident from the legal left’s unthinking and overwrought denunciations of Kavanaugh’s nomination. To indignant progressives, no candidate of libertarian or conservative persuasion is fit for a seat on the Supreme Court. That much is evident from the juvenile criticisms of the Kavanaugh nomination by a group of progressive senators who fear he will undo much of the modern New Deal state. In a similar vein, a group of Yale Law School students and alumni announced that they were “ashamed” of their institution and its Dean, Heather Gerken, for praising a nominee whose positions they found utterly unacceptable because, among other things, Kavanaugh penned “a 2015 dissent arguing that the ACA’s contraceptive mandate violated the rights of religious organizations, even though those organizations were granted an accommodation that allowed them to opt out of providing contraceptive coverage.” Michael Waldman, the President of the Brennan Center for Justice, described his nomination as “an alarming day for the law of democracy” because “the Roberts Court has been activist, relentless and destructive,” citing as support the rulings in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) dealing with corporate speech and Shelby County Alabama v Holder (2013) “gutting the Voting Rights Act.” To New Yorker commentator John Cassidy, Kavanaugh is “an ‘extreme nominee’ whose confirmation would represent an imminent threat to Roe v. Wade and the Affordable Care Act,” and should be rejected by anyone “who harbors a sense of fairness and history.”