After all his big talk over the past year, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) finally did something of some consequence on Friday when he insisted on a week delay in Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation push to investigate sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh. But don’t give Flake too much credit yet—experience shows he always caves, and he’s setting himself up to do the same thing this time. Check out this quote:
“Any nominee who lies to the committee, that is disqualifying,” the Arizona Republican told reporters. “If there’s evidence that comes back that corroborates Christine Ford’s story, then all of us will look at it that way.”
That first line sounds promising, doesn’t it? “Any nominee who lies to the committee, that is disqualifying.” We know Kavanaugh has lied to the committee, in both his hearings. It’s not even difficult to document and it seems like every day a new former classmate comes forward to reiterate that Kavanaugh has lied like a beer-soaked fraternity rug about his past drinking habits.
But that second line … “If there’s evidence that comes back that corroborates Christine Ford’s story, then all of us will look at it that way.” That’s limiting the disqualification to a very specific type of lie that’s established in a very specific way. Reality is that Ford’s account has a lot of corroboration—in what’s known about how memory works for trauma survivors, the fact that every detail that people have been able to pin down has been shown to be at least plausible, and in Kavanaugh’s desperate evasions and lies about things like his drinking. Also, what about Deborah Ramirez? What if evidence comes back that corroborates her story? Or, for that matter, Julie Swetnick? Flake is working hard to draw himself a very narrow set of reasons to decide that Kavanaugh is disqualified, and the “then all of us will look at it that way” claim highlights the nonsense factor of this statement.
We have to fight tooth and nail to keep this party from continuing to control the Senate. Can you give $3 to elect Democrats in Nevada and Texas?
Tuesday, Oct 2, 2018 · 4:34:41 PM +00:00
·
Laura Clawson
He's at it again. Flake said that Kavanaugh had been “sharp and partisan.” He said “We can’t have that on the court.” But, Elaina Plott writes:
I caught up with Flake briefly as he left the event, and asked if this meant he would not vote to confirm Kavanaugh, even if the FBI cleared him by week’s end. He appeared rattled, and his handlers rushed him into the stairwell. “I didn’t say that …” he stammered. “I wasn’t referring to him.”