JAMAL KHASHIOGGI'S MURDER: ONE MURDER TOO MANY.

ICHEOKU says his horrific murder must not go unanswered, Enough of the barbarism going on in Saudi Arabia which they have now exported to an embassy in Istanbul. It is either they conform to acceptable human behavior or have them banished them from any civilized associations and contacts. To hell with them and their bloody oil money. Just saw the dismembered remains of Jamal Khashoggi and it is shockingly hair raising and it is not yet even Halloween. Pitifully SAD.

SAUDI ARABIA: THE MOST STUPID NATION ON EARTH, THEIR CUP IS ABOUT FULL.

ICHEOKU says the enclave of white robe wearing deviants have been indiscriminately killing people and for so long. But it seems that they have eventually killed one person too many and will now be held to account. Apparently the time to force them to drink their medicine has finally come and the world awaits to see how America, their chief protector,  will react. ICHEOKU says America must react strongly and firmly, otherwise what happened in Istanbul is capable of causing some undesirable consequences.

A Satanic, devilish and devious nation of dullards and unthinking fools, who could not even manage their acts well, but have become so brazen and audacious with fermenting murders everywhere that they have now taken it overseas. ICHEOKU says which country in the world would send 15 mediocre killers to go hunt down just one unarmed fat man, who is not even a sportsman, talkless of being a black belt martial arts practitioner. Why did they need that many killers, descending down on Istanbul with, such a large footprint, that there was no way in hell they would have successfully pulled their bloody act off without being caught. How did they think that they will be able to get away with it. 

But they are as stupid, reckless and careless, as they are bloated and fat on the waist lines, and you wonder why they thought they can kill themselves into clinging to their antiquated monarchy forever. Which clandestine operation in the world, be it by the CIA, the MOSSAD, the FSP or the MI5, except where the target is inside a secured military location or fort, would 15 "men" be sent for such an operation. But inside their own secured embassy, with their own personnel and security staff, they sent 15 stupid and untrained bums, to go take down an unarmed journalist Jamal Khashoggi. A man who is not even athletic and could have been so easily taken down with only one well placed karate chop on the neck. But instead, the Saudis sent 15 jackasses to go hack him to death and partake in the macabre bloody orgy, right inside their own embassy. 

ICHEOKU is still trying to recover from the shock of their belated admission, after weeks of shameless denials and claiming that Jamal had left the embassy, that they murdered an innocent man inside their embassy in Istanbul. But what ICHEOKU has not been able to understand or have failed or refused to understand is why that so many people were needed to get the job done, regardless of the nature. Just one man who has already been trapped right inside their snare, and in their own embassy. All they would have done, if they must, was inject him with some numbing drug and ferry him back to Riyadh and then deal with him there. Or alternatively, inject him with a body and mind wasting drug and turn him loose for him to die elsewhere. But they were possessed and they were hungry to please their masters in Riyadh and they went crazy, chopping their quarry to pieces. 

What the Saudis did in Istanbul is not only disgustingly horrible, but attests to their crass incompetence, unmitigated wickedness and height of barbarism. They drive sadistic joy in torturing and slaughtering and dismembering human beings. Meanwhile their useless armed forces cannot even defeat a tiny Yemen, in a war of attrition that have lasted far too long and should be stopped forthwith; and despite their being far better equipped than the impoverished country of Yemen. 

Saudi Arabia have gotten away with so much blood letting, including those killed by Saudi citizens. Stories abound of their Philippines domestic servants, black migrants and other Bangladeshi and Indian migrant construction workers, who their employers regularly murder without consequences, including those they skin alive and throw into the forest to die a painful slow death, rather than paying them their rightly earned wages. 

Their close alliance to America is actually the problem here and they are sullying America's name and place in the world, as a fairly balanced moral authority. But they have gone too far with this murder in Istanbul, that they should be henceforth seen and treated as an abhorable, evil commune of fat sadists that should be excommunicated and have no further thing to do with civilized humanity. They should be avoided like leprosy and conferred with a full pariah status. 

These Saudi Arabians are not humans beings. They are wild animals, worse than jackals, hyenas and wild dogs; and America must do something to register its disgust about what they did in Istanbul and have been doing internally and for so long. It is either America acts firmly, including forgoing the bloody oil money, and rise up to the challenge or America will forever lose their standing in the world stage as a moderator of acceptable decent behavior, an upright moral compass of the world. ICHEOKU therefore aligns self with Russian's Vladimir Putin's statement that sanctioning Russia for the Salisbury nerve gas attack and looking the other way in the matter of the barbaric torture and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi by the Saudis is the height of selective righteous indignation. 

It is not fair nor justifiable and it must not be allowed to go unpunished. Enough of the barbaric primitivity of Riyadh; time to force them to change their evil ways has come and an opportunity to so do presented itself in Jamal Khashoggi's brutal murder. 9/11 happened and nothing was done to register America's displeasure and now this? Imagine how many people who have their heads hacked off in Riyadh every Friday, some of them innocent women, for merely not doing what their husbands commanded. There is no way these animals should be allowed to participate in affairs of human beings because they are not humans beings. Simply a very hard sell and they expect real human beings to still respect any Saudi Arabian animal, anywhere, tomorrow. 

At worse, let the world boycott their oil, shun them or better still just level the gaddam God forsaken place with a neutron bomb and solve all the nonsense Islamic terrorism which they groom and sponsor from their bloody place. It was horrendous looking at the dismembered body of Jamal Khashoggi in black garbage bags, just like a cow in a slaughter house. 

Worse still, a staff of that embassy in Istanbul tipped off Riyadh about the impending visit of Jamal Khashoggi to the embassy and they sent 15 bloody buffoons to go and waylay him as he arrived to keep a date with an appointment, not knowing that the appointment was with a horrific, torturous death. ICHEOKU hereby forswears every Saudi Arabia and will never see them as human beings again; and it does not matter the situation or condition and their bloody money could as well burn to hell. All of them might as well be headed to hell for all ICHEOKU cares and for crying out loud. What manner of demented people are these Saudis that would commit such a heinous, beastly act. Also, they don't give a damn nor care a hoot about human lives. Away with them. Enough of their barbarism and goriness.

MAZI NNAMDI KANU IS ALIVE: HURRAY!

ICHEOKU says it was indeed a sightly sight to behold, seeing the leader of IPOB, who was rumored to have been since killed and whose whereabout hitherto, was unknown, make a cameo appearance. ICHEOKU does not care either way what manner of restrictions he is currently placed in; the fact of his being alive is paramount and in short, the only controlling authority that matters. ICHEOKU says definitely a good welcome development. May God protect the leader and keep him safe and sound IJN.

SAUDI ARABIA: THE KILLING OF JAMAL KHASHOGGI WAS UNINTENTIONAL?

ICHEOKU says have always known that short of a brazen audacity and stupidity by rank amateurs, that the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi was accidental, to say the least. Otherwise why couldn't 15 security agents over power him, bundle him up and abduct him; and return him back to Riyadh and then do with him however they may please, right inside their own territory. Why cause such an international incident that would embarrass and put America in a bad light, being a friend and ally. 

It does not make sense, never made sense and it does not portray a thinking nation with smart and intelligent security professionals. It was a bungled and botched job, which has left an indelible stain on those white robes which those mullahs wear over there. It is unthinkably sad to have a human being slaughtered like a ram in this 21st century, when people are talking about humane treatment of human beings. But crying all the rivers in the world will not Jamal Khashoggi bring back nor made whole again. So, the world, including America, must begin to find any possible way to move past the dastardly act and also find a way to punish and sanction Saudi Arabia for what they did and albeit force them into a better behavior, because they are all killers in that Kingdom, despite all the pretentiousness, sanctimony, opulence, gold, ornaments and white robes. Like a painted sepulcher, they stink right through and into their bone mallows. What a bloody murderers they are.

ICHEOKU will therefore proceed to accept their latest explanation that the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi inside their embassy in Instabul Turkey was not a direct intentional act, but an intended abduction went awry; a result of something going terribly wrong with whatever they had planned, an action went awry. 

However, this does not completely absolve the Kingdom of Saud, because the buck stopped on their royal household desk in Riyadh. They must therefore be made to pay a hefty fine and in the alternative, forced to become a morally better and more civilized better human beings, who begins to have respect for human life and who henceforth recognizes the sanctity of the human life. What a barbaric people who are still stuck in the past century, people who still slaughter fellow human beings like a ram. Not good. 

ICHEOKU says the bloodletting and goriness in Saudi Arabia is simply too disgusting and needs to stop; otherwise the world should banish them and their dirty bloody oil and blood money, and completely excise them from the rest of the world and civilized associations. It is now undeniably true that these robe wearing, fat-waist, primitive people lack credibility and morality. It is indeed a very sad development that they had to be forced to finally admit their criminality, despite weeks of repeated bold faced denial and manufactured alternative universe stories for the gods. Adieu Jamal.

SAUDI ARABIA: A BUMBLING TERRORIST GOVERNMENT.

ICHEOKU says if it is proven that the government in Riyadh had anything to do with the disappearance of the Saudi Arabia born journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, there will be a huge price to pay. No despotic government should be allowed to bank on their friendship with Washington DC to wreck havoc on its people, especially those ones already on self exile for fear of their lives and not within their own countries' territorial space. 

Stories abound of so many countries which throw their citizens to wild dogs to be devoured alive and nothing happened; simply because it was their internal affairs matter and there is no need to disturb the groove just because their government decided to solve their problem their own way and in a manner they know best how to. This indifference is more pronounced where the perpetrating country is a rich country with vast and extensive investments in Western economies and fear of their pulling their money out, compels the beneficiary Western countries to look the other way and not to attract the ire of such despotic countries. Saudi Arabia is one such country and they have milked it for such a long time. 

Saudi Arabia has been going rogue on international laws and respect for human rights of their citizens; and getting away with so many of such murders and for such a very long time, that it has somewhat become normal, tolerable and acceptable. This has empowered them somewhat to continuously deploy such a reign of terror  on their citizens, in order to maintain their servile obedience and peradventure, continue to survive as an absolute monarchical government. 

But this particular murder, the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, is a murder gone too far. If and when they are eventually found culpable, they should be made to pay a hefty price, including cutting off of diplomatic relationship, if that is what it will take to make them a better government, that is compliant with respect for the human rights and the protection of her citizens. They cannot continue their systematic elimination of those of their citizens who they consider existential threat to their despotic well being, without consequences. 

The world was happy to welcome the initial baby steps reforms by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman; and were happy when he allowed women to drive and encouraged them to work in Saudi Arabia. There were other commendable sundry reforms which he engineered since coming to power. But all these lofty ideals must not be a license for unchecked despotism. Indiscriminate arrest and imprisonment of critics, arbitrary executions, torturing and murdering, and now dismembering of critics by the government, is a bridge too far and which they must not be allowed to get away with. 

Even Kim Jong Un does not dismember North Korean citizens, admitted he had fed his uncle alive to a pack of starving wild dogs. Saudi Arabia went too far and in such a brazen, idiotic, petulant manner, which has now forced Washington DC into a corner, and which demands only a commensurate severe response. There is simply no way of getting around it or sugar-coating the egregiousness of what took place in Turkey; even at the pain of losing their investments in the United States of America. 

How could they go this rogue and on a foreign territory and be this mean and very brutish, to torture, murder and then dismember a journalist inside their embassy in Turkey, for simply writing mere stories and reporting news. His crime did not fit the punishment; and he was not even charged, tried and convicted. Such intolerant, despotic arbitrariness, must not be tolerated and they must be made to pay a King's ransom, short of severing every diplomatic ties with the Kingdom of Saud. If they could be this audacious in a foreign country, imagine what goes on inside their Kingdom where they maintain maximum dictatorship; and you wonder what animals these white robe wearing humanoids are that could carry out such a brazen, barbaric, human rights violations of her citizen, torturing, murdering and dismembering him. 

Why murder a critical journalist on a foreign soil. Why not just kidnap him, take him back to Saudi Arabia, try him for whatever offense he might have committed, convict him and then lock him up for good. Why do such a pedestrian, unprofessional job of killing him inside their embassy, knowing fully well that there will be traces, questions and that there will be no other possible way to explain his disappearance short of producing him. That he was seen and witnessed entering the consulate and was expected to also be seen coming out of it. That when he did not step out as he had stepped in, that his journey ended right inside the consulate. A very poor, untrained and inept executioners, did a poor dirty number on a journalist and they cannot escape the consequences. So, the question is what degree of punishment will be meted out to Saudi Arabia, rather than their proving their innocence short of producing the journalist. 

ICHEOKU heretofore calls on every world governments, including Washington DC, to register their united displeasure at Saudi Arabia, by immediately severing all diplomatic and economic contacts with Riyadh.  The measure could be for just a few months, as a warning that such dastardly act is not tolerable, cannot be tolerated and will not be tolerated in the future. 

They were not even smart in going about it, because were they, they would have taken a page from Kremlin and have hired assassins gun down the journalist in the middle of the road, while going to the embassy, if they must kill him. But to have him come into the embassy and whack and dismember him there, is the height of gross ineptitude, none professionalism and an unthinking barbarism. What happened to the mantra of "without a trace?" Why pull off such job when you know that it can be traced to you? Carrying out a State sponsored terror on an innocent citizen, whose only weapon is his key pad, is not a good testimonial for any government, particularly one which is considered a friend of the United States of America. 

The Saudi Arabian government killed Jamal Khashoggi, but they did not succeed in actually killing him, as millions world wide have now come to know the journalist, whom only a very few knew prior. They tried to silence him by killing him, but have now thrown millions of candle light searchlight on their Kingdom and how despotic their government is. A government that tortures, kills and dismembers journalists is not human and does not belong in the comity of civilized Nations, such that the United Nations Organization should consider taking action against them as well. In short they burnt their fingers and hands, as well as their feet and legs in carrying out this hit on Mr Khashoggi. The action was both pathetic and imbecilic in execution, and smacks of job by rank amateurs. 

How can you reform a government when you are killing those who are pointing you to the direction of the areas where the reforms are needed. Your critics are often your best friends, for a reason that you learn from them by not continuing in your trajectory of errors. The government in Riyadh went too far and must be punished for carrying out such barbaric act, torturing, murdering and dismembering a journalist on a foreign soil.

ICHEOKU says it is rather too patronizing for the government in Riyadh to so simplistically dismiss the accusation that it has a hand in the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, as lies and baseless allegation; otherwise where is Jamal. If the accusations are false, then they should produce Jamal Khashoggi or explain how a person who walked into their embassy in Turkey, magically disappeared without a trace and did not walk back out. 

Recall that the Saudi Arabia born journalist and a Washington Post contributor, Jamal Khashoggi, vanished on October 2, 2018 after entering the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul to obtain documents for his upcoming marriage to his Turkish bride. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has also said that Turkey is in possession of a video which showed how Jamal Khashoggi was "interrogated, tortured and then murdered" inside the consulate before his body was dismembered. Not good.

ICHEOKU says Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is forever tainted and forever damaged for orchestrating this heinous murder of a journalist; except of course, some conservative rogue elements in his government, who does not like his reformist agenda, decided to pull a fast one on him, in order to make him a pariah in the Western world. ICHEOKU says anything short of this far fetched theory, that it was a rogue elements of his government that carried out the torture, murder and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi, without permission or authorization from the highest echelon of the government, will forever cast a beastly shadow on the young Crown Prince and his reputation is forever damaged and irreparably too. Not good. Put in another way, the guy is a beast who authorized this barbarism and he should be avoided as a heartless, blood sucking, goombah. He does not belong in a civilized society. Pitiful Dracula of Riyadh. SAD.

HILLARY CLINTON'S SECURITY CLEARANCE REVOKED: GOOD FOR HER.

ICHEOKU says facing an impending revocation of her security clearance, precursor to her eventual possible arrest for her criminal behavior of destroying subpoenaed evidence, the Jezebel of our time and American presidential politics reject, Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton, in order to save face, has asked that her security clearance be revoked and her wish has since been granted her. 

Query, who asks for such revocation of such very prestigious privilege, except someone who knows that its revocation is inevitably, very imminent. Poor Hillary - first she lost her second presidential bid and now this golden security clearance. Please remember her in your prayers that she does not become so disheveled as to become headed to the deep end or the cliff's edge. Can the stars be so aligned against someone in this manner? SAD.

KANYE WEST: SHOWS SOME LOVING TO TRUMP.

ICHEOKU says when, following Hurricane Katrina devastation of New Orleans, Kanye West ripped into then President George Walker Bush, for not caring for black people to rescue them, nobody castigated him from the far left as being an Uncle Tom. When the same Kanye West rushed the stage and yanked the microphone out of Taylor Swift's hands and berated the organizers of the award for not favoring Beyonce because she is black, nobody on the left attacked him for being a tool in the hands of the White oppressors of America. 

But suddenly, seeing the good work which President Donald John Trump is doing, especially those things that are helping black American communities, including the ongoing prison reform and jobs availability, the rapper previously known as Kanye West and now Ye, has developed an admiration for the president. He went to visit the president at the White House and made statements which are favorably disposed to the president, but the lunatic left wingers will not have any of it. Now they are calling him all manners of names, accusing him of being mentally unstable and that he has completely lost his mind. ICHEOKU says what's wrong with these people? #MAGA. 

NIKKI, I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT WE WILL MISS YOU - TRUMP

ICHEOKU says as the American ambassador to the United Nations Organization, Governor Nikki Haley, resigns her appointment, President Donald John Trump told her, "Nikki, I just wanted to tell you that we will miss you.” 

ICHEOKU says whether she was fired, pushed or otherwise voluntarily made the decision, Nikki is now gone from the United Nations, effective end of the year 2018; and the Russians will definitely now take a breath, Nikki, having been a torn in their fresh. 

ICHEOKU says all the best Nikki and may your future political light never dims. She was a good ambassador and a tough one for that matter too. America has not heard the last from her and will certainly hear more of and from her. So long Nikki.

KAVANAUGH LAUGHS LAST: KUDOS

ICHEOKU says in victory, that is. May evil never be allowed to ever trump over good, no matter the size or shape or form in which it came or presented itself.  Justice Brett Michael Kavananugh is loved by many and it helped him plow through the noisy mob that America witnessed throughout his confirmation process. 

Eventually victory was his and today he is sworn in and sits at the apex court as an associate Justice of the SCOTUS. May his tenure as associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America be fruitfully remembered as one rich in jurisprudence and constitutionalism IJN.

WHY WE FIGHT - PDJT

“For the sake of our freedom, and for the sake of our children, we are going to work, we are going to fight, and we are going to win, win, win. We will not bend. We will not break. We will never give in. We will never give up. We will never back down. We will never surrender. We will always fight on to victory.” - President Donald John Trump.

KAVANAUGH SWORN IN: CONGRATULATIONS.

ICHEOKU says Judge Brett Michael Kavanaugh was finally sworn in Saturday evening as the 114th Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Chief Justice John Roberts administered the Constitutional Oath, while retired Justice Anthony M Kennedy administered the Judicial Oath; both held in the Justices' Conference Room of the Supreme Court. The 53-year-old judge, was confirmed earlier in the day by a 50-48 votes in the Senate, perfectly split along the line of the divided political leanings in Nigeria. 

ICHEOKU strongly agrees with President Donald John Trump that real America people are proudly honored that Judge Kavanaugh was able to withstand the horrible, horrible attacks by the Democrats. It was a horrible attack which nobody should have to go through. But the beautiful thing is, he is now in. He's going to be there for a long time. And he's just an outstanding intellect, outstanding scholar, a brilliant lawyer, brilliant at everything he's ever done. So we're very happy. It was a great vote, a very historic vote." 

ICHEOKU says completely satisfied and aligned to the president's assessment. Congratulations is Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh and may your admission into the citadel of Justice in the land meet you with a good judicial fortune, as you continue to apply the law of the land in every matter before you, and without let or hindrance or any other undue external influence. Congratulations. 

KAVANAUGH’S ELEVATION TO THE SCOTUS: THE HEROES AND A HEROINE.

ICHEOKU says without any of these fellas, Judge Brett Kavanaugh would not have become a Justice of the Supreme Court Of The United States today. The Judge was exceptionally brilliant and equated himself very well at the hearing; and his defense of Dr Ford’s allegation was spectacularly convincing. 

Then enter President Donald John Trump for nominating him and standing solidly behind him all the way. And of course, Senator Lindsey Graham’s shot in the arm to the process with that fiery remarks which revitalized a nearly fatally wounded candidacy, which was wobbling from a serious criminal allegation of sexual molestations. That his admonition was eloquently well delivered, both in pitch, tone and demeanor. 

Then welcome the lioness heroine of the entire confirmation process, whose erudite speech was the icing on the cake that made Judge Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court elevation a fait accompli. Boy, was the great Senator from the great State of Maine was indeed what courage really looks like. Senator Susan Collins is it; the real deal madam of the Senate. She owned it and she has indelibly left her name on gold etchings in the marble and for eternity. 

But unbeknownst to the entire watching world, was the man who usually speaks little but carries the big stick. He is a man of only a few words, but a doer of immeasurable accomplishments. He is the puppet master, who actually is the grand wizard that chaperoned the confirmation to fruition. He is called the turtle for his strangely similar neck to a turtle. He is the Republican Senate majority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, the great Senator from the great State of Kentucky. ICHEOKU says he gets the biggest bravo for all his behind the scene political wizardly that saw the process successfully completed, with Judge Kavanaugh sworn in. 

ICHEOKU says these are the heroes and a heroine who made this possible and real Americans are appreciative and grateful. ICHEOKU wishes Justice B.M. Kavanaugh a beautiful tenure at the Supreme Court of the United States of America. 

KAVANAUGH’S ELEVATION: THE VILLAINS WHO NEARLY SCUTTLED IT.

ICHEOKU says thankfully Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh has been sworn in as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. But had any of these fellas had their way, the Judge will be hold up in an undisclosed location, sulking and lamenting about a dream denied. But God is an American and owns this country, hence he raised his angels and ordered them to go take charge and today the rest is now history. 

ICHEOKU says may it not ever be well with all the pitch fork bearing traducers, who threw to the dogs all their legal training and practicing taught them, just to lynch an innocent man because he is an upright person. Anyway, their evil conspiratorial plot has been defeated and Judge Kavanaugh is now an Associate Justice of the SCOTUS. ICHEOKU prays that all they heaped on an innocent man, including all the false charges and testimonies, be multiplied for them IJN. 

Senate minority leader Charles Ellis Schumer swore from the onset that he would do everything within his power to defeat the nominee and prevent his ever being sworn in as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Boy, did he try with his army of lunatics and they cane so close to achieving their devilish objective. Now, he must be reliving the agonies of November 8, 2018, all over again. What a torture. 

Then came Senator Spartacus Cory Booker of Newark New Jersey. His grandstanding and bombastic threat to release an otherwise classified information about Judge Kavanaugh went up in smoke, as it was found to be merely hot air. He too should be hiding his face in shame now, wondering why he foreclosed on his chances of ever advancing in American nationwide politics with such a macabre display of rascality in the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing room. 

ICHEOKU says then came the leaking Dianne Feinstein who received a letter from Dr Ford and hid it from her colleagues for three months, only to leak it to the media, despite Dr Ford’s plea and request that it be kept confidential. Pitiful leaky dirty Dianna and at 85 years old, she is simply too old to remain in the Senate. Shame on her. 

Then we have the nut job Aloha Senator from Hawaii, Maxie Hiroro, who told American men to SHUT THE FUCK UP. ICHEOKU says if this woman is not the worst thing to happen to womanhood, then nothing else; not even the Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton was ever this uncouth. ICHEOKU pities her husband, if she has one. Imagine the hell that guy must be living in and going through, married to such a street queer. 

Then came all the Democratic Party members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who are lawyers, but who wanted to sacrifice the rule of law of audi alterem patem on the alter of politics. A guy was accused of one of the most heinous and hideous crimes ever imaginable, sexual molestation; yet without evidence, any nor sufficient, they wanted to convict and execute him by denying him a well merited and rightly earned elevation to the Supreme Court. 

I WILL VOTE TO CONFIRM JUDGE KAVANAUGH - SUSAN COLLINS

"Mr. President, the five previous times that I have come to the floor to explain my vote on the nomination of a justice to the United States Supreme Court, I have begun my floor remarks explaining my decision with a recognition of the solemn nature and the importance of the occasion.

But today we have come to the conclusion of a confirmation process that has become so dysfunctional it looks more like a caricature of a gutter-level political campaign than a solemn occasion.

The President nominated Brett Kavanaugh on July 9th. Within moments of that announcement, special interest groups raced to be the first to oppose him, including one organization that didn’t even bother to fill in the Judge’s name on its pre-written press release – they simply wrote that they opposed “Donald Trump’s nomination of XX to the Supreme Court of the United States.” A number of Senators joined the race to announce their opposition, but they were beaten to the punch by one of our colleagues who actually announced opposition before the nominee’s identity was even known.

Since that time, we have seen special interest groups whip their followers into a frenzy by spreading misrepresentations and outright falsehoods about Judge Kavanaugh’s judicial record. Over-the-top rhetoric and distortions of his record and testimony at his first hearing produced short-lived headlines which, although debunked hours later, continue to live on and be spread through social media. Interest groups have also spent an unprecedented amount of dark money opposing this nomination.

Our Supreme Court confirmation process has been in steady decline for more than thirty years. One can only hope that the Kavanaugh nomination is where the process has finally hit rock bottom.

Against this backdrop, it is up to each individual Senator to decide what the Constitution’s “advice and consent” duty means. Informed by Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist 76, I have interpreted this to mean that the President has broad discretion to consider a nominee’s philosophy, whereas my duty as a Senator is to focus on the nominee’s qualifications as long as that nominee’s philosophy is within the mainstream of judicial thought.

I have always opposed litmus tests for judicial nominees with respect to their personal views or politics, but I fully expect them to be able to put aside any and all personal preferences in deciding the cases that come before them. I have never considered the President’s identity or party when evaluating Supreme Court nominations. As a result, I voted in favor of Justices Roberts and Alito, who were nominated by President Bush, Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, who were nominated by President Obama, and Justice Gorsuch, who was nominated by President Trump.

So I began my evaluation of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination by reviewing his 12-year record on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, including his more than 300 opinions and his many speeches and law review articles. Nineteen attorneys, including lawyers from the non-partisan Congressional Research Service, briefed me many times each week and assisted me in evaluating the judge’s extensive record. I met with Judge Kavanaugh for more than two hours in my office. I listened carefully to the testimony at the Committee hearings. I spoke with people who knew him personally, such as Condoleezza Rice and many others. And, I talked with Judge Kavanaugh a second time by phone for another hour to ask him very specific additional questions.

I have also met with thousands of my constituents, both advocates and many opponents, regarding Judge Kavanaugh. One concern that I frequently heard was that Judge Kavanaugh would be likely to eliminate the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) vital protections for people with preexisting conditions. I disagree with this contention. In a dissent in Seven-Sky v. Holder, Judge Kavanaugh rejected a challenge to the ACA on narrow procedural grounds, preserving the law in full. Many experts have said his dissent informed Justice Roberts’ opinion upholding the ACA at the Supreme Court.

Furthermore, Judge Kavanaugh’s approach toward the doctrine of severability is narrow. When a part of a statute is challenged on constitutional grounds, he has argued for severing the invalid clause as surgically as possible while allowing the overall law to remain intact.

This was his approach in his dissent in a case that involved a challenge to the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (PPH v. CFPB). In his dissent, Judge Kavanaugh argued for “severing any problematic portions while leaving the remainder intact.” Given the current challenges to the ACA, proponents, including myself, of protections for people with pre-existing conditions should want a Justice who would take just this kind of approach.

Another assertion I have heard often is that Judge Kavanaugh cannot be trusted if a case involving alleged wrongdoing by the President were to come before the Court. The basis for this argument seems to be two-fold. First, Judge Kavanaugh has written that he believes that Congress should enact legislation to protect presidents from criminal prosecution or civil liability while in office. Mr. President, I believe opponents miss the mark on this issue. The fact that Judge Kavanaugh offered this legislative proposal suggests that he believes that the President does not have such protection currently.

Second, there are some who argue that given the current Special Counsel investigation, President Trump should not even be allowed to nominate a justice. That argument ignores our recent history. President Clinton, in 1993, nominated Justice Ginsburg after the Whitewater investigation was already underway. And she was confirmed 96-3. The next year, just three months after Independent Counsel Robert Fiske was named to lead the Whitewater investigation, President Clinton nominated Justice Breyer. He was confirmed 87-9.

Supreme Court Justices have not hesitated to rule against the presidents who have nominated them. Perhaps most notably in United States v. Nixon, three Nixon appointees who heard the case joined the unanimous opinion against him.

Judge Kavanaugh has been unequivocal in his belief that no president is above the law. He has stated that Marbury v. Madison, Youngstown Steel v. Sawyer and United States v. Nixon are three of the four greatest Supreme Court cases in history. What do they have in common? Each of them is a case where the Court served as a check on presidential power. And I would note that the fourth case that Judge Kavanaugh has pointed to as the greatest in history was Brown v Board of Education.

One Kavanaugh decision illustrates the point about the check on presidential power directly. He wrote the opinion in Hamdan v. United States, a case that challenged the Bush Administration’s military commission prosecution of an associate of Osama Bin Laden. This conviction was very important to the Bush Administration, but Judge Kavanaugh, who had been appointed to the DC Circuit by President Bush and had worked in President Bush’s White House, ruled that the conviction was unlawful. As he explained during the hearing, “We don’t make decisions based on who people are, or their policy preferences, or the moment. We base decisions on the law….”

Others I met with have expressed concerns that Justice Kennedy’s retirement threatens the right of same sex couples to marry. Yet, Judge Kavanaugh described the Obergefell decision, which legalized same gender marriages, as an important landmark precedent. He also cited Justice Kennedy’s recent Masterpiece Cakeshop opinion for the Court’s majority stating that: “The days of treating gay and lesbian Americans or gay and lesbian couples as second-class citizens who are inferior in dignity and worth are over in the Supreme Court.”

Others have suggested that the judge holds extreme views on birth control. In one case, Judge Kavanaugh incurred the disfavor of both sides of the political spectrum for seeking to ensure the availability of contraceptive services for women while minimizing the involvement of employers with religious objections. Although his critics frequently overlook this point, Judge Kavanaugh’s dissent rejected arguments that the government did not have a compelling interest in facilitating access to contraception. In fact, he wrote that the Supreme Court precedent “strongly suggested” that there was a “compelling interest” in facilitating access to birth control.

There has also been considerable focus on the future of abortion rights based on the concern that Judge Kavanaugh would seek to overturn Roe v. Wade. Protecting this right is important to me.

To my knowledge, Judge Kavanaugh is the first Supreme Court nominee to express the view that precedent is not merely a practice and tradition, but rooted in Article III of our Constitution itself. He believes that precedent “is not just a judicial policy … it is constitutionally dictated to pay attention and pay heed to rules of precedent.” In other words, precedent isn’t a goal or an aspiration; it is a constitutional tenet that has to be followed except in the most extraordinary circumstances.

The judge further explained that precedent provides stability, predictability, reliance, and fairness. There are, of course, rare and extraordinary times where the Supreme Court would rightly overturn a precedent. The most famous example was when the Supreme Court in Brown v. Board of Education overruled Plessy v. Ferguson, correcting a “grievously wrong” decision--to use the judge’s term--allowing racial inequality. But, someone who believes that the importance of precedent has been rooted in the Constitution would follow long-established precedent except in those rare circumstances where a decision is “grievously wrong” or “deeply inconsistent with the law.” Those are Judge Kavanaugh’s phrases.

As Judge Kavanaugh asserted to me, a long-established precedent is not something to be trimmed, narrowed, discarded, or overlooked. Its roots in the Constitution give the concept of stare decisis greater weight such that precedent can’t be trimmed or narrowed simply because a judge might want to on a whim. In short, his views on honoring precedent would preclude attempts to do by stealth that which one has committed not to do overtly.

Noting that Roe v. Wade was decided 45 years ago, and reaffirmed 19 years later in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, I asked Judge Kavanaugh whether the passage of time is relevant to following precedent. He said decisions become part of our legal framework with the passage of time and that honoring precedent is essential to maintaining public confidence.

Our discussion then turned to the right of privacy, on which the Supreme Court relied in Griswold v. Connecticut, a case that struck down a law banning the use and sale of contraceptives. Griswold established the legal foundation that led to Roe eight years later. In describing Griswold as “settled law,” Judge Kavanaugh observed that it was the correct application of two famous cases from the 1920s, Meyer and Pierce, that are not seriously challenged by anyone today. Finally, in his testimony, he noted repeatedly that Roe had been upheld by Planned Parenthood v. Casey, describing it as “precedent on precedent.” When I asked him would it be sufficient to overturn a long-established precedent if five current justices believed it was wrongly decided, he emphatically said “no.”

Opponents frequently cite then-candidate Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to nominate only judges who would overturn Roe. The Republican platform for all presidential campaigns has included this pledge since at least 1980. During this time, Republican presidents have appointed Justices O’Connor, Souter, and Kennedy to the Supreme Court. These are the very three justices—Republican president appointed justices—who authored the Casey decision, which reaffirmed Roe. Furthermore, pro-choice groups vigorously opposed each of these justices’ nominations. Incredibly, they even circulated buttons with the slogan “Stop Souter Or Women Will Die!” Just two years later, Justice Souter coauthored the Casey opinion, reaffirming a woman’s right to choose. Suffice it to say, prominent advocacy organizations have been wrong.

These same interest groups have speculated that Judge Kavanaugh was selected to do the bidding of conservative ideologues, despite his record of judicial independence. I asked the judge point blank whether he had made any commitments or pledges to anyone at the White House, to the Federalist Society, or to any outside group on how he would decide cases. He unequivocally assured me he had not.

Judge Kavanaugh has received rave reviews for his 12-year track record as a judge, including for his judicial temperament. The American Bar Association (ABA) gave him its highest possible rating. Its Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary conducted an extraordinarily thorough assessment, soliciting input from almost 500 people, including his judicial colleagues. The ABA concluded that “his integrity, judicial temperament, and professional competence met the highest standard.”

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….” Ms. Blatt, who clerked for and is an ardent admirer of Justice Ginsburg, and who is, in her own words, “an unapologetic defender of a woman’s right to choose,” said that Judge Kavanaugh “fit[s] in the mainstream of legal thought.” She also observed that “Judge Kavanaugh is remarkably committed to promoting women in the legal profession.”

That Judge Kavanaugh is more of a centrist than some of his critics maintain is reflected in the fact that he and Chief Judge Merrick Garland voted the same way in 93 percent of the cases that they heard together. Indeed, Chief Judge Garland joined in more than 96 percent of the majority opinions authored by Judge Kavanaugh, dissenting only once.

Despite all this, after weeks of reviewing Judge Kavanaugh’s record and listening to 32 hours of his testimony, the Senate’s advice and consent role was thrown into a tailspin following the allegations of sexual assault by Professor Christine Blasey Ford. The confirmation process now involves evaluating whether or not Judge Kavanaugh committed sexual assault, and lied about it to the Judiciary Committee.

Some argue that because this is a lifetime appointment to our highest court, the public interest requires that doubts be resolved against the nominee. Others see the public interest as embodied in our long-established tradition of affording to those accused of misconduct a presumption of innocence. In cases in which the facts are unclear, they would argue that the question should be resolved in favor of the nominee.

Mr. President, I understand both viewpoints. This debate is complicated further by the fact that the Senate confirmation process is not a trial. But certain fundamental legal principles—about due process, the presumption of innocence, and fairness—do bear on my thinking, and I cannot abandon them.

In evaluating any given claim of misconduct, we will be ill served in the long run if we abandon the presumption of innocence and fairness, tempting though it may be. We must always remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in jeopardy.

The presumption of innocence is relevant to the advice and consent function when an accusation departs from a nominee’s otherwise exemplary record. I worry that departing from this presumption could lead to a lack of public faith in the judiciary and would be hugely damaging to the confirmation process moving forward.

Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why the presumption of innocence is so important. I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor Ford, but of the allegation that, when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang rape. This outlandish allegation was put forth without any credible supporting evidence and simply parroted public statements of others. 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.

Mr. President, I listened carefully to Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Judiciary Committee. I found her testimony to be sincere, painful, and compelling. I believe that she is a survivor of a sexual assault and that this trauma has upended her life. Nevertheless, the four witnesses she named could not corroborate any of the events of that evening gathering where she says the assault occurred; none of the individuals Professor Ford says were at the party has any recollection at all of that night.

Judge Kavanaugh forcefully denied the allegations under penalty of perjury. Mark Judge denied under penalty of felony that he had witnessed an assault. PJ Smyth, another person allegedly at the party, denied that he was there under penalty of felony. Professor Ford’s life-long friend Leland Keyser indicated that, under penalty of felony, she does not remember that party. And Ms. Keyser went further. She indicated that not only does she not remember a night like that, but also that she does not even know Brett Kavanaugh.

In addition to the lack of corroborating evidence, we also learned some facts that raised more questions. For instance, since these allegations have become public, Professor Ford testified that not a single person has contacted her to say, “I was at the party that night.”

Furthermore, the professor testified that although she does not remember how she got home that evening, she knew that, because of the distance, she would have needed a ride – yet not a single person has come forward to say that they were the one that drove her home or were in the car with her that night. And Professor Ford also indicated that even though she left that small gathering of six or so people abruptly and without saying goodbye and distraught, none of them called her the next day – or ever – to ask why she left – is she okay – not even her closest friend, Ms. Keyser.

Mr. President, the Constitution does not provide guidance as to how we are supposed to evaluate these competing claims. It leaves that decision up to each Senator. This is not a criminal trial, and I do not believe that claims such as these need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, fairness would dictate that the claims at least should meet a threshold of “more likely than not” as our standard.

The facts presented do not mean that Professor Ford was not sexually assaulted that night – or at some other time – but they do lead me to conclude that the allegations fail to meet the “more likely than not” standard. Therefore, I do not believe that these charges can fairly prevent Judge Kavanaugh from serving on the Court.

Let me emphasize that my approach to this question should not be misconstrued as suggesting that unwanted sexual contact of any nature is not a serious problem in this country. To the contrary, if any good at all has come from this ugly confirmation process, it has been to create an awareness that we have underestimated the pervasiveness of this terrible problem.

I have been alarmed and disturbed, however, by some who have suggested that unless Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination is rejected, the Senate is somehow condoning sexual assault. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Every person—man or woman--who makes a charge of sexual assault deserves to be heard and treated with respect. The #MeToo movement is real. It matters. It is needed. And it is long overdue. We know that rape and sexual assault are less likely to be reported to the police than other forms of assault. On average, an estimated 211,000 rapes and sexual assaults go unreported every year. We must listen to survivors, and every day we must seek to stop the criminal behavior that has hurt so many. We owe this to ourselves, our children, and generations to come.

Since the hearing, I have listened to many survivors of sexual assault. Many were total strangers who told me their heart-wrenching stories for the first time in their lives. Some were friends I have known for decades, yet with the exception of one woman who had confided in me years ago, I had no idea that they had been the victims of sexual attacks. I am grateful for their courage and their willingness to come forward, and I hope that in heightening public awareness, they have also lightened the burden that they have been quietly bearing for so many years. To them, I pledge to do all that I can to ensure that their daughters and granddaughters never share their experiences.

Over the past few weeks, I have been emphatic that the Senate has an obligation to investigate and evaluate the serious allegations of sexual assault. I called for and supported the additional hearing to hear from both Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh. I also pushed for and supported the FBI supplemental background investigation. This was the right thing to do.

Christine Ford never sought the spotlight. She indicated that she was terrified to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and she has shunned attention since then. She seemed completely unaware of Chairman Grassley’s offer to allow her to testify confidentially in California. Watching her, Mr. President, I could not help but feel that some people who wanted to engineer the defeat of this nomination cared little, if at all, for her well-being.

Professor Ford testified that a very limited number of people had access to her letter. Yet that letter found its way into the public domain. She testified that she never gave permission for that very private letter to be released. And yet, here we are. We are in the middle of a fight that she never sought, arguing about claims that she wanted to raise confidentially.

One theory I have heard espoused repeatedly is that our colleague, Senator Feinstein, leaked Professor Ford’s letter at the eleventh hour to derail this process. I want to state this very clearly: I know Senator Diane Feinstein extremely well, and I believe that she would never do that. I knew that to be the case before she even stated it at the hearing. She is a person of integrity, and I stand by her.

I have also heard some argue that the Chairman of the Committee somehow treated Professor Ford unfairly. Nothing could be further from the truth. Chairman Grassley, along with his excellent staff, treated Professor Ford with compassion and respect throughout the entire process. And that is the way the Senator from Iowa has conducted himself throughout a lifetime dedicated to public service.

But the fact remains, Mr. President, that someone leaked this letter against Professor Ford’s express wishes. I suspect, regrettably, that we will never know for certain who did it. To that leaker, who I hope is listening now, let me say that what you did was unconscionable. You have taken a survivor who was not only entitled to your respect, but who also trusted you to protect her – and you have sacrificed her well-being in a misguided attempt to win whatever political crusade you think you are fighting. My only hope is that your callous act has turned this process into such a dysfunctional circus that it will cause the Senate – and indeed all Americans – to reconsider how we evaluate Supreme Court nominees. If that happens, then the appalling lack of compassion you afforded Professor Ford will at least have some unintended positive consequences.

Mr. President, the politically charged atmosphere surrounding this nomination had reached a fever pitch even before these allegations were known, and it has been challenging even then to separate fact from fiction.

We live in a time of such great disunity, as the bitter fight over this nomination both in the Senate and among the public clearly demonstrates. It is not merely a case of different groups having different opinions. It is a case of people bearing extreme ill will toward those who disagree with them. In our intense focus on our differences, we have forgotten the common values that bind us together as Americans. When some of our best minds are seeking to develop ever more sophisticated algorithms designed to link us to websites that only reinforce and cater to our views, we can only expect our differences to intensify.

This would have alarmed the drafters of our Constitution, who were acutely aware that different values and interests could prevent Americans from becoming and remaining a single people. Indeed, of the six objectives they invoked in the preamble to the Constitution, the one that they put first was the formation of “a more perfect Union.”

Their vision of “a more perfect Union” does not exist today, and if anything, we appear to be moving farther away from it. It is particularly worrisome that the Supreme Court, the institution that most Americans see as the principal guardian of our shared constitutional heritage, is viewed as part of the problem through a political lens.

Mr. President, we’ve heard a lot of charges and counter charges about Judge Kavanaugh. But as those who have known him best have attested, he has been an exemplary public servant, judge, teacher, coach, husband, and father. Despite the turbulent, bitter fight surrounding his nomination, my fervent hope is that Brett Kavanaugh will work to lessen the divisions in the Supreme Court so that we have far fewer 5-4 decisions and so that public confidence in our Judiciary and our highest court is restored. Mr. President, I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh."