This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/03/us/politics/trump-republicans-kavanaugh-confirmation.html

The article has changed 14 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 9 Version 10
Senate Republicans Ready for Confirmation Vote, Ahead of F.B.I. Review White House Sends F.B.I. Interviews on Kavanaugh to Senate
(about 1 hour later)
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans set the stage Wednesday night for a pair of late-week votes on the confirmation of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, pushing forward even as senators awaited a chance to review an F.B.I. investigation into the allegations of sexual misconduct that could determine his fate. WASHINGTON — The White House sent interviews conducted by the F.B.I. to the Senate early Thursday morning and expressed confidence that none of the information collected by agents should stand in the way of the Senate voting to confirm Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
The material was conveyed to Capitol Hill in the middle of the night, just hours after Senate Republicans set the stage for a pair of votes later in the week to move to final approval of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. A statement issued by the White House around 2:30 a.m. said the F.B.I. had completed its work and that it represented an unprecedented look at a nominee.
“The White House has received the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s supplemental background investigation into Judge Kavanaugh, and it is being transmitted to the Senate,” Raj Shah, a White House spokesman, said in the statement, which was posted on Twitter.
“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,” he added. “With this additional information, the White House is fully confident the Senate will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.”
The White House statement gave no further details about the material, but an official briefed on the F.B.I. review said the bureau contacted 10 people and interviewed nine of them. It was not clear why the 10th person was not interviewed. The White House concluded that the interviews did not corroborate sexual misconduct accusations against Judge Kavanaugh.
In a show of confidence, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, walked to the floor of the Senate late Wednesday night — before the White House had even transferred the F.B.I.’s findings — to initiate a procedural vote on Friday and a potential final confirmation vote that could take place as soon as Saturday.In a show of confidence, Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, walked to the floor of the Senate late Wednesday night — before the White House had even transferred the F.B.I.’s findings — to initiate a procedural vote on Friday and a potential final confirmation vote that could take place as soon as Saturday.
“There will be plenty of time for members to review and be briefed on the supplemental material before a Friday cloture vote,” he said in brief remarks.“There will be plenty of time for members to review and be briefed on the supplemental material before a Friday cloture vote,” he said in brief remarks.
But Mr. McConnell’s confidence belied yet another day of roiling fights that included new objections voiced by Democrats over the investigation itself and Republican tactics, as well as condemnation by three influential Republicans of President Trump for mocking one of the women who have accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. But Mr. McConnell’s confidence belied yet another day of roiling fights that included new objections voiced by Democrats over the investigation itself and Republican tactics, as well as condemnation by three influential Republicans of Mr. Trump for mocking one of the women who have accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.
As they were waiting for the investigative files, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee insinuated that previous F.B.I. background checks of Judge Kavanaugh had, in fact, turned up evidence of either inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse. A letter from Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, and other Democrats chastised committee Republicans for a Twitter post that said “nowhere” in the earlier F.B.I. checks “was there ever a whiff of ANY issue — at all — related in any way to inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse.”As they were waiting for the investigative files, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee insinuated that previous F.B.I. background checks of Judge Kavanaugh had, in fact, turned up evidence of either inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse. A letter from Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, and other Democrats chastised committee Republicans for a Twitter post that said “nowhere” in the earlier F.B.I. checks “was there ever a whiff of ANY issue — at all — related in any way to inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse.”
Information in the post “is not accurate,” the Democrats wrote.Information in the post “is not accurate,” the Democrats wrote.
“It is troubling that the committee majority has characterized information from Judge Kavanaugh’s confidential background information on Twitter,” they wrote.“It is troubling that the committee majority has characterized information from Judge Kavanaugh’s confidential background information on Twitter,” they wrote.
Republicans called the letter “more baseless innuendo and more false smears.”Republicans called the letter “more baseless innuendo and more false smears.”
The exchange was just part of the fierce jockeying between the parties. Hours before the documents were expected to arrive, Republicans stepped up efforts to question the credibility of the first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, confronting her with a sworn statement from a former boyfriend who questioned assertions she made during an explosive public hearing last week. The exchange was just part of the fierce jockeying between the parties. Hours before the documents arrived, Republicans stepped up efforts to question the credibility of the first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, confronting her with a sworn statement from a former boyfriend who questioned assertions she made during an explosive public hearing last week.
And Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, warned that the interview summaries might be worthless because the investigation did not include interviews with Judge Kavanaugh, Dr. Blasey, or witnesses identified as corroborators by his second accuser, a classmate at Yale named Deborah Ramirez. Those restrictions, she wrote, raise “serious concerns that this is not a credible investigation and begs the question: What other restrictions has the White House placed on the F.B.I.?”.And Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, warned that the interview summaries might be worthless because the investigation did not include interviews with Judge Kavanaugh, Dr. Blasey, or witnesses identified as corroborators by his second accuser, a classmate at Yale named Deborah Ramirez. Those restrictions, she wrote, raise “serious concerns that this is not a credible investigation and begs the question: What other restrictions has the White House placed on the F.B.I.?”.
But it was the three Republicans — Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Jeff Flake of Arizona — who injected the most uncertainty into the confirmation. Together they pushed for the F.B.I. investigation over Mr. McConnell’s wishes, and they could determine whether Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court. Mr. Trump’s mockery of Dr. Blasey at a Mississippi campaign rally on Tuesday only heightened tensions.But it was the three Republicans — Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Jeff Flake of Arizona — who injected the most uncertainty into the confirmation. Together they pushed for the F.B.I. investigation over Mr. McConnell’s wishes, and they could determine whether Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court. Mr. Trump’s mockery of Dr. Blasey at a Mississippi campaign rally on Tuesday only heightened tensions.
“I am taking everything into account,” Ms. Murkowski told reporters. “The president’s comments yesterday mocking Dr. Ford were wholly inappropriate and in my view unacceptable.”“I am taking everything into account,” Ms. Murkowski told reporters. “The president’s comments yesterday mocking Dr. Ford were wholly inappropriate and in my view unacceptable.”
On NBC’s “Today,” Mr. Flake called the remarks “appalling.” He said, “There is no time and no place for remarks like that, but to discuss something this sensitive at a political rally is just not right.”On NBC’s “Today,” Mr. Flake called the remarks “appalling.” He said, “There is no time and no place for remarks like that, but to discuss something this sensitive at a political rally is just not right.”
And Ms. Collins told reporters in the Capitol they were “just plain wrong.”And Ms. Collins told reporters in the Capitol they were “just plain wrong.”
Ms. Collins did not indicate that the comments would affect her final vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Mr. Flake said they would not affect his: “No, you can’t blame or take it out on other people, the president’s insensitive remarks.”Ms. Collins did not indicate that the comments would affect her final vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Mr. Flake said they would not affect his: “No, you can’t blame or take it out on other people, the president’s insensitive remarks.”
Instead, the senators said they would judge the results of the F.B.I.’s supplemental background investigation. Senate officials were expecting to receive the investigative material early Thursday, but said that no one from either party would look at it until later Thursday morning. Because the White House was expected to produce just a single copy of the findings, Republicans and Democrats planned to take turns early Thursday morning looking at the files in a secured room in the Capitol, the officials said. Instead, the senators said they would judge the results of the F.B.I.’s supplemental background investigation. Senate officials have said that no one from either party would look at the information until later Thursday morning. Because the White House was expected to produce just a single copy of the findings, Republicans and Democrats planned to take turns early Thursday morning looking at the files in a secured room in the Capitol, the officials said.
Senators from both parties said they would like to see the F.B.I.’s findings eventually made public in some form, but a previous agreement governing background investigations like the one into Judge Kavanaugh could make that legally difficult.Senators from both parties said they would like to see the F.B.I.’s findings eventually made public in some form, but a previous agreement governing background investigations like the one into Judge Kavanaugh could make that legally difficult.
A four-page memorandum between the Judiciary Committee and the White House precludes disclosure of contents of a background file by the committee, and lays out circumstances under which designated staff members or senators who disclose its contents without authorization can be punished.A four-page memorandum between the Judiciary Committee and the White House precludes disclosure of contents of a background file by the committee, and lays out circumstances under which designated staff members or senators who disclose its contents without authorization can be punished.
White House lawyers have concluded that a similar memorandum dealing with Privacy Act restrictions bars them from making the contents public either, or from commenting on them with any specificity.White House lawyers have concluded that a similar memorandum dealing with Privacy Act restrictions bars them from making the contents public either, or from commenting on them with any specificity.
An F.B.I. background investigation differs considerably from more familiar criminal investigations, and is based principally on gathering information to inform decisions by senators and the White House. In a criminal investigation, agents make crucial investigative decisions about scope and strategy, and they are able to use search warrants and subpoenas to compel evidence. Agents working a background investigation have no such tools, and they get explicit marching orders through the White House Counsel’s Office.An F.B.I. background investigation differs considerably from more familiar criminal investigations, and is based principally on gathering information to inform decisions by senators and the White House. In a criminal investigation, agents make crucial investigative decisions about scope and strategy, and they are able to use search warrants and subpoenas to compel evidence. Agents working a background investigation have no such tools, and they get explicit marching orders through the White House Counsel’s Office.
Still, Mr. Trump’s remarks about Dr. Blasey dominated much of the day.Still, Mr. Trump’s remarks about Dr. Blasey dominated much of the day.
Liberal opponents of Judge Kavanaugh turned Mr. Trump’s verbal assault on Dr. Blasey into an internet advertisement intended to pressure Ms. Collins, Mr. Flake and Ms. Murkowski.Liberal opponents of Judge Kavanaugh turned Mr. Trump’s verbal assault on Dr. Blasey into an internet advertisement intended to pressure Ms. Collins, Mr. Flake and Ms. Murkowski.
Democratic senators railed against his insensitivity. And Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, took to Twitter to “plead with all” to stop attacks and “destruction of” Dr. Blasey.Democratic senators railed against his insensitivity. And Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, took to Twitter to “plead with all” to stop attacks and “destruction of” Dr. Blasey.
But in a sign of how the Kavanaugh debate has shattered the longstanding rules of decorum in the Senate, the Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer of New York, nearly accused his Republican counterpart, Mr. McConnell, of lying after Mr. McConnell accused Democrats of trying to delay the confirmation vote.But in a sign of how the Kavanaugh debate has shattered the longstanding rules of decorum in the Senate, the Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer of New York, nearly accused his Republican counterpart, Mr. McConnell, of lying after Mr. McConnell accused Democrats of trying to delay the confirmation vote.
“It is a blatant falsehood,” Mr. Schumer declared. “I’m so tempted to use the ‘L’ word — but he is my friend — to say the Democrats caused the delay.”“It is a blatant falsehood,” Mr. Schumer declared. “I’m so tempted to use the ‘L’ word — but he is my friend — to say the Democrats caused the delay.”
Mr. McConnell railed against protesters who have dogged him and other Republican senators.Mr. McConnell railed against protesters who have dogged him and other Republican senators.
“One of our colleagues and his family were effectively run out of a restaurant in recent days. Another reported having protesters physically block his car door,” he said.“One of our colleagues and his family were effectively run out of a restaurant in recent days. Another reported having protesters physically block his car door,” he said.
“I’m not suggesting we’re the victims here,” he went on. “But I want to make it clear to these people who are chasing my members around the hall here, or harassing them at the airports, or going to their homes. We will not be intimidated by these people.”“I’m not suggesting we’re the victims here,” he went on. “But I want to make it clear to these people who are chasing my members around the hall here, or harassing them at the airports, or going to their homes. We will not be intimidated by these people.”
Mr. Trump’s tone toward Dr. Blasey has shifted in the days since she first came forward with a story that Judge Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her more than 30 years ago when they were both teenagers. The president initially avoided criticizing her directly and said he would watch her testimony before the Judiciary Committee closely.Mr. Trump’s tone toward Dr. Blasey has shifted in the days since she first came forward with a story that Judge Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her more than 30 years ago when they were both teenagers. The president initially avoided criticizing her directly and said he would watch her testimony before the Judiciary Committee closely.
But on Tuesday, before a cheering crowd in Mississippi, he dispensed with that reserve, deriding Dr. Blasey’s emotional testimony of what happened that night.But on Tuesday, before a cheering crowd in Mississippi, he dispensed with that reserve, deriding Dr. Blasey’s emotional testimony of what happened that night.
“Thirty-six years ago this happened. I had one beer, right? I had one beer,” Mr. Trump said, imitating Dr. Blasey.“Thirty-six years ago this happened. I had one beer, right? I had one beer,” Mr. Trump said, imitating Dr. Blasey.
“How did you get home? I don’t remember,” he said. “How’d you get there? I don’t remember. Where is the place? I don’t remember. How many years ago was it? I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know.”“How did you get home? I don’t remember,” he said. “How’d you get there? I don’t remember. Where is the place? I don’t remember. How many years ago was it? I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know. I don’t know.”