BTRTN: Roe v. Wade, and Collins v. Kavanaugh

[reggieandlee]

Born To Run The Numbers on Susan Collins' comment that that if the leaked Alito draft becomes the final decision, “it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office.” BTRTN thinks Collins must publicly substantiate this very weighty accusation – and then asks the fundamental question: If a Justice lied to a Senator to win confirmation to the Supreme Court, shouldn’t there be consequences?

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2022/05/btrtn-roe-v-wade-and-collins-v-kavanaugh.html

Excerpts: "A supporter of a woman’s right to choose, Collins claimed to have grilled Kavanaugh before emerging assured that he had no intention of reversing Roe. So strong was the interest in Collins' vote that she took the unusual step of making a speech on the floor of the Senate to explain the full reasoning behind her decision to support Kavanaugh, which essentially ensured his confirmation...
"We can infer that 'completely inconsistent' is merely an uber-discreet way of saying 'those dudes lied to me.' If Kavanaugh lied to Collins about Roe v. Wade in order to secure her vote... well, shouldn't there be consequences for that?
"Is it possible that in a private meeting with Collins, Kavanaugh said that the only reason to overturn an established precedent is if it is 'grievously wrong, and Susan Collins failed to ask Kavanaugh whether he thought Roe was 'grievously wrong?
"Chief Justice John Roberts professes grave concern about the fact that the Supreme Court is now perceived as excessively politicized. Now, a sitting U.S. Senator is claiming that two recent nominees lied to her during their confirmation hearings to secure her confirmation vote. You would think a Chief Justice who was concerned about the reputation of the Supreme Court would want to investigate such a consequential allegation."

[SheilaAnn]

1. Wouldn't ya think....sigh. n/t

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. Nope. No consequences. Sorry, suckers.

It takes two-thirds of the Senate to oust him. He's set for life. We're stuck with him.

This is a result of Hillary's loss. We suffer the consequences, not Kavanaugh.

[Midnight Writer]

3. When will Collins no longer be described as "a supporter of a woman's right to choose"?

She has chosen not to stand up for women's rights at every juncture. How does that make her a "supporter"?

[wryter2000]

4. It's not the only thing he lied about

He should be tried for perjury.

[reggieandlee]

7. Agreed!

I wish John Roberts would finally stand up and demand to know what was said in these private meetings. In corporate America, if someone lies in a job interview to get hired, they can get terminated for cause.

[Walleye]

5. We can't really rely on Collins to tell the truth either

[nevergiveup]

6. The final draft will at least to some extent

be modified and this modification no matter how insignificant will satisfy Susan's concerns and give her the out she needs.

[11 Bravo]

8. I find it more likely that the Countess of Concern simply heard what she wanted to hear.

[reggieandlee]

9. Fair point...

...But if hearing what she wanted to hear as opposed to what was actually said helped her get re-elected, the good people of Maine deserve to know that. She is now essentially accusing Kavanaugh (and Gorsuch) of lying to her. I think she owes everybody an explanation of exactly what she heard.

[11 Bravo]

10. I could not agree more.

And even if se's telling the truth, I want to see her hammered as being too naive to serve in the US Senate.

[Buckeyeblue]

11. If Collins really believes that she should make the talk show rounds and say it loud and publicly

She won't. I don't know that they lied in their hearings so much as they were vague. If the said something else behind closed doors, it's because they were instructed to.

Tell her what she wants to hear, is probably what McConnell advised.

[reggieandlee]

12. Yes, and...

I believe that it is extremely likely Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were vague, both in the public hearings (we know that much!), and likely in the private meeting as well.

But Collins herself insists that they were not vague. She insisted that she reached a point of clarity and certainty that Kavanaugh would not reverse Roe. She said as much at the time, and reiterated that position last week.

This article is simply making the point that if she heard such an unequivocal assertion from Kavanaugh -- and that was the basis for a decisive vote for confirmation -- we all are entitled to know exactly what those words were.

That would, at minimum, put Kavanaugh in the position of explaining why his position on Roe had changed from "settled law" to "egregiously wrong" in the span of the four years that he has been on the Supreme Court. More likely, it would force him to say that he felt Roe was "egregiously wrong" at the time of his confirmation, in which case Collins would conclude that she lied to him in order to gain confirmation.

One could argue that is impeachable...

[Buckeyeblue]

13. Or Kavanaugh says Collins is lying

Maybe the real story is that McConnell told Collins that she would have a primary challenger if she didn't vote for Kavanaugh.

Collins, thinking that Roe was probably still safe, made her comments and voted for Kavanaugh.

I don't think he told her Roe was safe. I know I said in my previous post that maybe McConnell told him to tell her whatever it took. But her vote only mattered in that Pence didn't have to break a tie.

But...if he really did lie to her, once the opinion comes out, she should call him a liar every chance she gets.