that there "justice for all" https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-la...nts-dismissed-with-further-appeals-possible-2 The panel once again confirmed that the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, the federal law establishing a process for filing judicial misconduct complaints, only covers lower court judges. While the original order was unanimous, this time two judges—Tenth Circuit Judges Mary Beck Briscoe and Carlos Lucero—did not agree with the decision. They argued that a new panel of judges should review the claims this time around in order to provide a meaningful appeal. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fe...-over-justice-kavanaugh-misconduct-complaints Federal court panel dismisses appeals over Justice Kavanaugh misconduct complaints “Because the intervening event in this matter resulted in the loss of jurisdiction,” said the court, referring to Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court, “this Council does not have the authority to investigate or make findings upon which to base any remedial action.” “I am left to conclude that the entire Council should be disqualified from participating in consideration of the current petitions for review,” wrote Judge Mary Beck Briscoe. “And, in turn, I conclude that the petitions for review should be considered by a different body, specifically the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability.” Judge Carlos Lucero agreed.
Seeing the dispicable Kavanaugh smear ... this judgement is quite correct no matter the technical aspects that led to it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/...h-ramirez-yale.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimes During the winter of her freshman year, a drunken dormitory party unsettled her deeply. She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it. Some of the onlookers, who had been passing around a fake penis earlier in the evening, laughed. Mr. Kavanaugh, now a justice on the Supreme Court, has adamantly denied her claims. Those claims became a flash point during his confirmation process last year, when he was also fighting other sexual misconduct allegations from Christine Blasey Ford, who had attended a Washington-area high school near his. But while we found Dr. Ford’s allegations credible during a 10-month investigation, Ms. Ramirez’s story could be more fully corroborated. During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was. At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time. We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. (We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.) Mr. Kavanaugh did not speak to us because we could not agree on terms for an interview. But he has denied Dr. Ford’s and Ms. Ramirez’s allegations, and declined to answer our questions about Mr. Stier’s account. Ms. Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own. Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.” Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island and member of the Judiciary Committee, later said, “I would view the Ramirez allegations as not having been even remotely investigated.” Other Democrats agreed. Ultimately, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, concluded, “There is no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez.” Mr. Kavanaugh was confirmed on Oct. 6, 2018, by a vote of 50-48, the closest vote for a Supreme Court justice in more than 130 years.
NYT deletes bizarre tweet referencing Brett Kavanaugh’s ‘harmless’ penis By Laura Italiano September 15, 2019 | 1:41am | Updated Enlarge Image @NYTOpinion's now- deleted tweet and first retraction Twitter More On: the new york times NYT under fire for 9/11 tweet saying 'airplanes took aim' at towers Disgraced MIT-er Joichi Ito out at NYT Comey criticism nowhere to be found in New York Times New York Times drawing heat for revising stories again In a bizarre series of tweets and retractions on @nytopinion on Saturday, The New York Times cringingly opined on its latest Brett Kavanaugh story, then retracted the tweet, then retracted the retraction, then posted an apology. The missteps began at 5:13 p.m., when a reckless tweet posted to @nytopinion opined, “Having a penis thrust in your face at a drunken dorm party may seem like harmless fun…” The misfire was apparent commentary on the paper’s latest story on the new Supreme Court justice, which revisits accusations by fellow Yalie Deborah Ramirez, who has said a pantsless Kavanaugh assaulted her at a party during freshman year. Two minutes after that first tweet posted, at 5:16 p.m., a retraction posted reading, “We have deleted an earlier tweet to this article that was poorly phrased.” Soon after, that retraction also vanished. Finally, at 11 p.m., the paper apologized and left it at that. “We deleted a previous tweet regarding this article,” the final tweet read. “It was offensive, and we apologize.” Still, the internet is forever, and screengrabs of the first offending tweet and its retraction drew fire well into Sunday morning. We deleted a previous tweet regarding this article. It was offensive, and we apologize. https://t.co/gbUdweKbDg — New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) September 15, 2019
everyone corrects their tweets: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/15/trump-brett-kavanaugh-1496181 “Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for liable, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue,” the president tweeted, misspelling the word “libel.” Approximately an hour after the original tweet, he sent out a new tweet with the correct spelling.
New York Times drawing heat for revising stories again "We apologize again for the fault in the subtitles. Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked." -Monty Python
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...ual-misconduct-allegations-resurface-n1054581 Democrats call for Kavanaugh impeachment over new sexual misconduct claims "I sat through those hearings," Sen. Kamala Harris, a member of the Senate Judiciary Commitee and a Democratic presidential candidate, tweeted on Sunday. "Brett Kavanaugh lied to the U.S. Senate and most importantly to the American people. He was put on the Court through a sham process and his place on the Court is an insult to the pursuit of truth and justice. He must be impeached."