RIYADMEDIA

U.S. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell told Reuters on Saturday that the political brawl over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation would help Republicans retain control of the Senate, calling it a

“seminal event” leading into the November elections.

“We’d been trying to figure out how to get the base excited about this election, and nothing unifies Republicans like a court fight,” McConnell said in a phone interview just before the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh in a 50-48 vote. “It’s been a seminal event leading into the fall election.”

The intense debate over sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh gripped the American public for weeks, bringing protesters out in force on Capitol Hill and across the country, including near the homes of lawmakers.

“We’ve literally been under assault by the mob,” McConnell said.

Unifying force

But he claimed the intensity has proved to be an aid to Republican unity in the Senate, as the party prepares to take the issue onto the campaign trail.

“This has all really helped me, No. 1, unify my conference, and No. 2, underscore the significance of the Senate,” the Kentucky Republican said.

McConnell even welcomed the acrimony of the political brawl: “I don’t want it to dissipate over the next four weeks, I can tell you.”

Republicans are trying to cling to a narrow 51-49 Senate majority in congressional elections that will be held on Nov. 6. Several Democrats are running for re-election in states that Republican President Donald Trump won in 2016, making for an uphill fight for them to win a Senate majority.

“We fully intend to be talking about this going into the fall election,” McConnell added. “The energy level is high. We’ve seen the numbers in the races shifting in our direction. This has been good for us politically.”

FBI probe

Kavanaugh’s confirmation appeared to be in trouble a week ago, when three Republican senators, along with Democrats, demanded a supplemental FBI investigation into allegations brought against the nominee by women, including psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford and a former Yale University classmate, Debbie Ramirez.

McConnell credited a meeting to discuss the Federal Bureau of Investigation probe with undecided Republican Sens. Jeff Flake, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski as proving critical to the success of Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

“The scope of the FBI’s … investigation was determined not by the administration but by us, this group,” he said. “I think that was the key moment.”

Flake and Collins voted in favor of Kavanaugh’s confirmation, while Murkowski opposed it but asked to be recorded as “present.”
…

The contrast was stark.

Christine Blasey Ford was calm and careful as she testified to U.S. senators last week that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her as a teenager. Then Kavanaugh sat at the same table and angrily denied the allegations. He talked back to his questioners; he called the process “a national disgrace.”

Kavanaugh’s behavior triggered a new line of debate in his bid to be confirmed to the nation’s highest court — whether he is temperamentally suited for the job. As senators prepare to take their final vote on his lifetime appointment, his fury that day — and how women’s and men’s anger are perceived differently in politics and beyond — has been front and center in the national conversation.

“Powerful white men in this country have often been able to use anger to emphasize the seriousness of the points they want to make,” said Rebecca Traister, a political writer whose book Good and Mad: The Revolutionary Power of Women’s Anger, came out this week.

“Women are told if they want to be taken seriously, believed, respected, they must not speak out of anger or use angry tones,’’ she said. “If they do, they’ll sound irrational, unserious, emotional, and not trusted or respected in a public or political sphere.”

Kavanaugh was able to choose anger as a tool in his own defense, “but that tool wasn’t even on the table for Christine Blasey Ford,” Traister said in an interview at VOA in Washington.

Collective anger

At the same time, she said, women’s collective anger has often been the catalyst for real social change. Her book details how U.S. movements from abolition and suffrage to civil rights, gay rights and women’s rights in the 1970s revved up when women came together in anger about perceived injustices.

“If you look at the history, though we’ve never really been told their stories, there are furious women at the beginning of all those movements,” she said.

That may be happening now as well. Women protesters flooded Senate office buildings and marched to the Supreme Court this week, calling on senators to vote against Kavanaugh. 

 

WATCH: Kavanaugh Confirmation Battle Opens Space for Women’s Anger

The he-said-she-said testimony, with little to gain for Ford, was just the latest in a series of events that have upset American women, especially those who support Democrats, since Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election to Donald Trump almost two years ago. On the day after his inauguration, Jan. 21, 2017, millions took to the streets of Washington and cities across America and the world for the “Women’s March,” igniting political action that has led to record woman candidates in the midterm elections Nov. 6.

Anger is a motivating, propellant force for all kinds of political activism,” Traister said. “There is a vast and rich history of women coming together in frustration and resentment and anguish and fury around the world, and in working to change the structures that contain and subjugate them.”

​Individual anger

For one woman protester last week, activist and sexual assault survivor Ana Maria Archila, getting angry and letting it show changed the conversation. She was one of two women who challenged Republican Senator Jeff Flake in an elevator, demanding that he take survivors’ testimonies into account in his decision on Kavanaugh.

In an interview, Archila said she was reacting to reports that Flake was going to give his unconditional support to Kavanaugh, and she decided to show how she really felt.

“I was reacting to how that felt in my body, what that meant for my children, and I think I was not going to try to censor myself, not going to try to be obedient and behave well,” she said. “I was really going to try to help him understand the message that he was sending to women across the country.”

After the interaction, which was caught live on CNN and widely viewed around the world, Flake and Democratic Senator Chris Coons delayed the confirmation process by asking Republican leaders for an FBI investigation of the Ford allegations.

That report was completed Wednesday, and senators had the chance to read it Thursday. Susan Collins, the Republican senator from Maine who was reported to be unsure about whether she would vote for Kavanaugh, confirmed Friday she didn’t find reason in the report not to support him.

For his part, Republican Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell blasted the crowds of angry women turning out to oppose Kavanaugh.

“Can we be scared by all these people rampaging through the halls, accosting members at airports, coming to their homes? Trying to intimidate the Senate into defeating a good man. Are we going to allow this to happen? In this country?” he said on the Senate floor Thursday.

Even as Kavanaugh is likely to join the high court, Traister and Archila both say this most recent episode may help shift the power dynamic between men and women in Washington.

“We are usually not alone, and connecting and being curious about other women’s anger, perhaps at the same things, is one of the pathways forward,” Traister said.
…

The contrast was stark.

Christine Blasey Ford was calm and careful as she testified to U.S. senators last week that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her as a teenager. Then Kavanaugh sat at the same table and angrily denied the allegations. He talked back to his questioners; he called the process “a national disgrace.”

Kavanaugh’s behavior triggered a new line of debate in his bid to be confirmed to the nation’s highest court — whether he is temperamentally suited for the job. As senators prepare to take their final vote on his lifetime appointment, his fury that day — and how women’s and men’s anger are perceived differently in politics and beyond — has been front and center in the national conversation.

“Powerful white men in this country have often been able to use anger to emphasize the seriousness of the points they want to make,” said Rebecca Traister, a political writer whose book Good and Mad: The Revolutionary Power of Women’s Anger, came out this week.

“Women are told if they want to be taken seriously, believed, respected, they must not speak out of anger or use angry tones,’’ she said. “If they do, they’ll sound irrational, unserious, emotional, and not trusted or respected in a public or political sphere.”

Kavanaugh was able to choose anger as a tool in his own defense, “but that tool wasn’t even on the table for Christine Blasey Ford,” Traister said in an interview at VOA in Washington.

Collective anger

At the same time, she said, women’s collective anger has often been the catalyst for real social change. Her book details how U.S. movements from abolition and suffrage to civil rights, gay rights and women’s rights in the 1970s revved up when women came together in anger about perceived injustices.

“If you look at the history, though we’ve never really been told their stories, there are furious women at the beginning of all those movements,” she said.

That may be happening now as well. Women protesters flooded Senate office buildings and marched to the Supreme Court this week, calling on senators to vote against Kavanaugh. 

 

WATCH: Kavanaugh Confirmation Battle Opens Space for Women’s Anger

The he-said-she-said testimony, with little to gain for Ford, was just the latest in a series of events that have upset American women, especially those who support Democrats, since Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election to Donald Trump almost two years ago. On the day after his inauguration, Jan. 21, 2017, millions took to the streets of Washington and cities across America and the world for the “Women’s March,” igniting political action that has led to record woman candidates in the midterm elections Nov. 6.

Anger is a motivating, propellant force for all kinds of political activism,” Traister said. “There is a vast and rich history of women coming together in frustration and resentment and anguish and fury around the world, and in working to change the structures that contain and subjugate them.”

​Individual anger

For one woman protester last week, activist and sexual assault survivor Ana Maria Archila, getting angry and letting it show changed the conversation. She was one of two women who challenged Republican Senator Jeff Flake in an elevator, demanding that he take survivors’ testimonies into account in his decision on Kavanaugh.

In an interview, Archila said she was reacting to reports that Flake was going to give his unconditional support to Kavanaugh, and she decided to show how she really felt.

“I was reacting to how that felt in my body, what that meant for my children, and I think I was not going to try to censor myself, not going to try to be obedient and behave well,” she said. “I was really going to try to help him understand the message that he was sending to women across the country.”

After the interaction, which was caught live on CNN and widely viewed around the world, Flake and Democratic Senator Chris Coons delayed the confirmation process by asking Republican leaders for an FBI investigation of the Ford allegations.

That report was completed Wednesday, and senators had the chance to read it Thursday. Susan Collins, the Republican senator from Maine who was reported to be unsure about whether she would vote for Kavanaugh, confirmed Friday she didn’t find reason in the report not to support him.

For his part, Republican Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell blasted the crowds of angry women turning out to oppose Kavanaugh.

“Can we be scared by all these people rampaging through the halls, accosting members at airports, coming to their homes? Trying to intimidate the Senate into defeating a good man. Are we going to allow this to happen? In this country?” he said on the Senate floor Thursday.

Even as Kavanaugh is likely to join the high court, Traister and Archila both say this most recent episode may help shift the power dynamic between men and women in Washington.

“We are usually not alone, and connecting and being curious about other women’s anger, perhaps at the same things, is one of the pathways forward,” Traister said.
…

Brandy Corwin likes that she can now wear makeup and nice clothes to work. That is because she is no longer working on the assembly line at the General Motors plant in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

“I was laid off multiple times, and having a family, you can’t rely on that,” she said.

For the past five months, Corwin, 28, has been working at Credit Adjustments, Inc. (CAI), a debt collection agency headquartered in her hometown of Defiance, Ohio, an hour outside the city of Toledo.

Corwin was a third-generation manufacturing worker and thought the assembly line was her fate. But now, she no longer has to work overtime and weekends to make ends meet. “I finally have a good work-to-home life balance,” she said, “and I didn’t have that before.”

Her two children “love seeing me come home dressed up,” Corwin said. “My son, he compliments me all the time: Wow, Mommy, your hair looks really nice,’ or ‘Wow, Mom, I love your dress,’ because I’m not walking home in dirty jeans and steel-toe boots.”

CAI opened its first area call center in downtown Toledo last January, providing 60 new job opportunities, with the goal of adding 150 more over the next year and 500 in the area over a three-year span.

“There’s been intentional investments in Toledo,” said Hayley Studer, CAI Chief Mission Officer, adding that much of the company’s regional workforce comes from health care, call centers, and customer service-based jobs.

As a result of the new investment, downtown Toledo is undergoing a “renaissance,” says Wendy Gramza, President and CEO of the Toledo Regional Chamber of Commerce, although the unemployment rate at 5.3 percent exceeds the national rate of 3.9 percent.

​Brighter days for manufacturing

Ohio lost more than 100,000 manufacturing jobs in the Great Recession that began in 2008 and its wake.

But employment numbers have improved considerably in the past three years.

Ohio has the third-largest statewide manufacturing workforce in the country, and the region’s advanced manufacturing industry has generated more than 4,900 jobs since 2015, along with $2.2 billion in capital investment, according to Regional Growth Partnership, an economic development group serving Toledo and northwest Ohio.

“We all believe that President [Donald] Trump has led the charge for this,” said Tim Copsey, director of new business inquiries at Paragon Tempered Glass, in Antwerp, Ohio. “We’re getting back onto a level playing field.”

“There was an optimism on January 1 of 2017, [shortly after Trump’s election victory],” said Larry Manz, director of sales and marketing at InSource Technologies, a Paulding-based contract manufacturing and engineering company. “People started buying capital equipment. They started investing. They started consuming goods, and all these things came together.”

Blue-collar workers in Ohio’s northwest manufacturing stronghold along Lake Erie helped propel Trump to presidential victory over former secretary of state Hillary Clinton in 2016 with 52.1 percent of the state’s vote.

Voters will be watching “who is for and who is against” Trump’s policies in the upcoming November election, Copsey says.

One such voter, Jason, is back at work after being laid off from his job as a maintenance worker in the aftermath of the recession.

“I was looking for a job every damn day,” Jason recalled. He asked VOA not to reveal his last name out of privacy concerns.

For several months in 2011, the 37-year-old performed a delicate balancing act, cutting everyday expenses — on the brink of having his water, gas and electric shut off — while searching for a decent-paying job to provide for his wife and children.

Now, the father of three is an automotive parts maintenance worker at Okamoto Sandusky Manufacturing in Sandusky, Ohio, working roughly 60 hours a week.

Jason credits both Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump for having a “part to play” in reversing the industry’s misfortunes. He believes manufacturing success stemmed from economic growth that started in the Obama administration, and has under Trump benefited from a fortified global economy, an increase in domestic demand and tax incentives for businesses.

With no particular political affiliation, he voted for Trump in 2016. His mind is not entirely made up on this November’s midterm elections, but: “I haven’t heard anything from the Democratic side that would really sway my vote at this point.”

He does have strong feelings about politicians: “We don’t care who it is, just don’t screw us over,” he said. “Don’t lie to us. Don’t screw us over.”

Less certain future

Across the region, manufacturing officials who spoke with VOA said while they increased hiring in 2017, it has since leveled off. Among their concerns: stiff competition for skilled labor, a housing and infrastructure shortage in rural areas, and rising health care costs.

Gramza notes that growth in regional manufacturing hasn’t translated to extensive new job creation in the sector. 

“A lot of our companies are innovating and automating,” Gramza told VOA. “While we’ve added new companies and new jobs, the number of people that are needed to work in the companies are keeping our overall count pretty stable.”

Democrat Jim Maldonado, an industrial electrician at a Chrysler manufacturing plant in Perrysburg, Ohio, is not optimistic about his industry’s future. His concern: tariffs on Chinese goods and a tax cut-induced rising deficit.

“Right now, [Trump’s trade war] is in its infancy,” Maldonado said. “Do I know if I’m going to lose my job? No, I don’t.”

A self-described “realist … not a dreamer,” Maldonado says electing candidates that “support working people” is his top priority this November, adding that no one in his plant likes being told who to vote for. Six years from retirement, his concern lies beyond 2018, even though he will pocket an additional $2,000 due to Republican tax cuts passed last December.

“Somebody is going to pay for that,” Maldonado said, concerned that entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare could eventually bear the brunt.

“[Trump] doesn’t need Social Security, and the people with him don’t need it, but who’s going to be dependent on that?” he asked emphatically. “I am — at some point!”

Changing workforce

Jerry Zielke, President of Northwest Ohio Regional Economic Development (NORED), describes one tactic for retaining a younger workforce: “Make awareness of what’s there, [and] try to get them engaged.”

“Getting beyond the idea that working a factory job is dirty and not very profitable and looked down upon, the factories — many of the ones I go into — are very clean, and it’s high tech, and they’re well lit, and they try to create family environments,” added Tami Norris, training coordinator at Northwest State Community College’s Advanced Manufacturing Training Center.

Toledo-native Marcus Odoms, 40 years old and a recent graduate of Northwest State’s Industrial Automation Maintenance certificate program, left the production side of manufacturing in part to relieve stress on his body, while gaining “hands on” experience with machinery.

When he began the program 12 months ago, Odoms said the starting wage was $18 to $21 per hour for industrial maintenance technicians. Now, he says, it’s up to $24.

Recently wedded with a newborn son and a certificate in hand, he says the decision will pay off. “We make a better case for raising my family in northwest Ohio,” Odoms said.

And the election?

Trump is planning to visit Ohio on October 12 to generate support for vulnerable congressional candidates. Only a few of Ohio’s congressional seats appear to be in play in this November’s election, and none are in the northwestern part of the state.

While congressional races in Ohio’s northwest seem to be reliably red, Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, appears comfortably headed for re-election. And Ohio’s race to replace Republican Governor John Kasich is pretty much tied, having just become the most expensive in the state’s history.

It will take “a mixture of the right Democrats with the right Republicans” to keep positive momentum going, says Copsey of Paragon Tempered Glass.
…

Allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh have mobilized women across the country to share their own stories of sexual assault and hold elected officials accountable. VOA’s congressional correspondent Katherine Gypson speaks with Ana Maria Archila, the sexual assault survivor whose personal challenge to Senator Jeff Flake last week may be a turning point in the #MeToo movement.
…

Allegations of sexual assault against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh have mobilized women across the country to share their own stories of sexual assault and hold elected officials accountable. VOA’s congressional correspondent Katherine Gypson speaks with Ana Maria Archila, the sexual assault survivor whose personal challenge to Senator Jeff Flake last week may be a turning point in the #MeToo movement.
…

A U.S. judge Friday blocked the Trump administration from placing conditions on public safety grants to further its crackdown on illegal immigration, and he ordered the grant money to be released to California “sanctuary cities.”

However, while Judge William Orrick in San Francisco found that the conditions placed last year on public safety grants by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions were unconstitutional, he stayed a nationwide injunction pending appeal.

The U.S. Department of Justice declined to comment.

The grant conditions required recipients to provide Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents access to jails and prisons, provide notice when detainees were being released and certify that information was being shared with federal authorities.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra sued the administration in August 2017. The state argued that putting the conditions on the $28 million in federal funds it expected would undermine law enforcement and deter police cooperation by immigrants, a major population in the state.

Scores of jurisdictions around the United States have adopted some form of “sanctuary city” policies, which generally prohibit cooperation with immigration officials. U.S. President Donald Trump had made a removing illegal immigrants a key campaign pledge, and he often criticizes the sanctuary cities.

Chicago, Philadelphia and Los Angeles have successfully sued the Trump administration over the conditions on the public safety funds, known as a Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, and those cases are pending appeal.

The use of nationwide injunctions by U.S. district courts has been a major roadblock to numerous Trump policies, and the appeals in the sanctuary city cases may provide an avenue for the administration to curtail their use by lower courts. 
…

A U.S. judge Friday blocked the Trump administration from placing conditions on public safety grants to further its crackdown on illegal immigration, and he ordered the grant money to be released to California “sanctuary cities.”

However, while Judge William Orrick in San Francisco found that the conditions placed last year on public safety grants by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions were unconstitutional, he stayed a nationwide injunction pending appeal.

The U.S. Department of Justice declined to comment.

The grant conditions required recipients to provide Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents access to jails and prisons, provide notice when detainees were being released and certify that information was being shared with federal authorities.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra sued the administration in August 2017. The state argued that putting the conditions on the $28 million in federal funds it expected would undermine law enforcement and deter police cooperation by immigrants, a major population in the state.

Scores of jurisdictions around the United States have adopted some form of “sanctuary city” policies, which generally prohibit cooperation with immigration officials. U.S. President Donald Trump had made a removing illegal immigrants a key campaign pledge, and he often criticizes the sanctuary cities.

Chicago, Philadelphia and Los Angeles have successfully sued the Trump administration over the conditions on the public safety funds, known as a Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, and those cases are pending appeal.

The use of nationwide injunctions by U.S. district courts has been a major roadblock to numerous Trump policies, and the appeals in the sanctuary city cases may provide an avenue for the administration to curtail their use by lower courts. 
…

Heading to Asia, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Friday that he hoped to develop options for the timing and location of the next summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korea leader Kim Jong Un.

The top U.S. diplomat will meet with Kim during his North Korean visit, which will be his fourth.

“There are complex scheduling, logistics issues,” Pompeo said en route to Japan, his first stop. He added he was hopeful that a general date and location for the summit might be reached in his meeting with Kim.

When asked whether he was taking any message or gift to Kim on Trump’s behalf, Pompeo told the traveling press: “I am not bringing anything that we are prepared at this point to talk about publicly.”

Earlier in the week, Pompeo said he hoped his North Korean visit would produce “better understandings, deeper progress, and a plan forward not only for the summit between the two leaders but for us to continue the efforts to build out a pathway for denuclearization.”

But analysts said Pompeo faces challenges to ensure a second summit produces real progress toward denuclearization.

“I think they cannot come out of these trips anymore with broad statements of principles. There needs to be some actual, tangible movement on the nuclear issue,” said Victor Cha, senior adviser and Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a research group in Washington.

Core issues

North Korea has not addressed core issues, including providing a list of nuclear weapons and facilities, giving a way to verify that information, and presenting a timeline for disposing of these things, added Cha during a phone briefing on Friday.

North Korea has been seeking a formal end to the 1950-53 Korean War, but the United States has said Pyongyang must give up its nuclear weapons first. North Korea has not satisfied Washington’s demands for a complete inventory of its nuclear weapons.

At a briefing on Wednesday, Pompeo would not give details of the ongoing negotiations, including the possibility of an end-of-war declaration.

While there is value to engagement at the highest levels, the downside is that this publicly raises the stakes for each meeting, according to former U.S. officials and experts.

“Real progress can only come from a sustained diplomatic process at lower levels, grounded in realistic expectations about what both sides can achieve,” former State Department official Mintaro Oba told VOA.

“We don’t have a diplomatic process in place,” said Suzanne DiMaggio, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a foreign policy research group with offices in Washington and other cities. “I would really like to see him go in there and lay out the vision for how do we get to a peace regime, step by step.”

While Washington is resisting calls from Russia and China to relax tough international sanctions against North Korea, some former U.S. officials say the “maximum pressure” campaign is diminished by Trump’s sometimes undiplomatic rhetoric.

“There’s an 800-pound elephant in the room, and that is our own president,” said Susan Thornton, who recently retired as principal deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs.

“His actions have helped put the nail in the coffin of maximum pressure. For example, when he says North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat, that undercuts our diplomats,” Thornton added Friday at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Pompeo will travel to Japan, North Korea, South Korea and China on Saturday through Monday. In Tokyo, he will meet with Japanese Prime Minister Abe and Foreign Minister Taro Kono. In Seoul, Pompeo will meet with South Korean President Moon Jae-in and Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha. In Beijing, he will meet with his counterparts and most likely will speak with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Pompeo’s trip to Beijing comes in the wake of a speech Thursday by Vice President Mike Pence in which he stepped up criticism of and laid out a more competitive strategy against China. Pence spoke at the Hudson Institute, a conservative research group in Washington.

‘A renewed cold war’

Observers said Washington’s new approach to Beijing was characterized by competition and confrontation.

“There is the beginning of some talk that we are really moving toward a renewed cold war, this time between the U.S. and China,” said Bonnie Glaser, director of the China Power Project at CSIS.

While China wants stability in the Korean Peninsula and does not want a U.S. presence, Beijing is using the North Korea issue to strengthen its relations with Washington, added Glaser.

“My own guess is that the U.S.-China relationship will pretty much be on hold until after the midterm elections. The Chinese have some hope that some of what is going on is being motivated by political concerns and that there might be more of a chance for some reasonable, constructive dialogue with the United States after the midterms,” said Glaser.

Senior officials traveling with Pompeo include Stephen Biegun, special representative for North Korea; Patrick Murphy, deputy assistant secretary of state for Southeast Asia; and  Allison Hooker, the White House National Security Council’s lead Korea official.

This will be Biegun’s first trip to Pyongyang as U.S. envoy. It was widely expected that Biegun’s North Korean counterpart, Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui, would return to Pyongyang from Beijing for talks.

Pompeo received his invitation to return to Pyongyang during his meeting with North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho on the sidelines of U.N. General Assembly session.

VOA’s Jeff Seldin contributed to this report.
…

Heading to Asia, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Friday that he hoped to develop options for the timing and location of the next summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korea leader Kim Jong Un.

The top U.S. diplomat will meet with Kim during his North Korean visit, which will be his fourth.

“There are complex scheduling, logistics issues,” Pompeo said en route to Japan, his first stop. He added he was hopeful that a general date and location for the summit might be reached in his meeting with Kim.

When asked whether he was taking any message or gift to Kim on Trump’s behalf, Pompeo told the traveling press: “I am not bringing anything that we are prepared at this point to talk about publicly.”

Earlier in the week, Pompeo said he hoped his North Korean visit would produce “better understandings, deeper progress, and a plan forward not only for the summit between the two leaders but for us to continue the efforts to build out a pathway for denuclearization.”

But analysts said Pompeo faces challenges to ensure a second summit produces real progress toward denuclearization.

“I think they cannot come out of these trips anymore with broad statements of principles. There needs to be some actual, tangible movement on the nuclear issue,” said Victor Cha, senior adviser and Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a research group in Washington.

Core issues

North Korea has not addressed core issues, including providing a list of nuclear weapons and facilities, giving a way to verify that information, and presenting a timeline for disposing of these things, added Cha during a phone briefing on Friday.

North Korea has been seeking a formal end to the 1950-53 Korean War, but the United States has said Pyongyang must give up its nuclear weapons first. North Korea has not satisfied Washington’s demands for a complete inventory of its nuclear weapons.

At a briefing on Wednesday, Pompeo would not give details of the ongoing negotiations, including the possibility of an end-of-war declaration.

While there is value to engagement at the highest levels, the downside is that this publicly raises the stakes for each meeting, according to former U.S. officials and experts.

“Real progress can only come from a sustained diplomatic process at lower levels, grounded in realistic expectations about what both sides can achieve,” former State Department official Mintaro Oba told VOA.

“We don’t have a diplomatic process in place,” said Suzanne DiMaggio, senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a foreign policy research group with offices in Washington and other cities. “I would really like to see him go in there and lay out the vision for how do we get to a peace regime, step by step.”

While Washington is resisting calls from Russia and China to relax tough international sanctions against North Korea, some former U.S. officials say the “maximum pressure” campaign is diminished by Trump’s sometimes undiplomatic rhetoric.

“There’s an 800-pound elephant in the room, and that is our own president,” said Susan Thornton, who recently retired as principal deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs.

“His actions have helped put the nail in the coffin of maximum pressure. For example, when he says North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat, that undercuts our diplomats,” Thornton added Friday at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Pompeo will travel to Japan, North Korea, South Korea and China on Saturday through Monday. In Tokyo, he will meet with Japanese Prime Minister Abe and Foreign Minister Taro Kono. In Seoul, Pompeo will meet with South Korean President Moon Jae-in and Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha. In Beijing, he will meet with his counterparts and most likely will speak with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Pompeo’s trip to Beijing comes in the wake of a speech Thursday by Vice President Mike Pence in which he stepped up criticism of and laid out a more competitive strategy against China. Pence spoke at the Hudson Institute, a conservative research group in Washington.

‘A renewed cold war’

Observers said Washington’s new approach to Beijing was characterized by competition and confrontation.

“There is the beginning of some talk that we are really moving toward a renewed cold war, this time between the U.S. and China,” said Bonnie Glaser, director of the China Power Project at CSIS.

While China wants stability in the Korean Peninsula and does not want a U.S. presence, Beijing is using the North Korea issue to strengthen its relations with Washington, added Glaser.

“My own guess is that the U.S.-China relationship will pretty much be on hold until after the midterm elections. The Chinese have some hope that some of what is going on is being motivated by political concerns and that there might be more of a chance for some reasonable, constructive dialogue with the United States after the midterms,” said Glaser.

Senior officials traveling with Pompeo include Stephen Biegun, special representative for North Korea; Patrick Murphy, deputy assistant secretary of state for Southeast Asia; and  Allison Hooker, the White House National Security Council’s lead Korea official.

This will be Biegun’s first trip to Pyongyang as U.S. envoy. It was widely expected that Biegun’s North Korean counterpart, Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son-hui, would return to Pyongyang from Beijing for talks.

Pompeo received his invitation to return to Pyongyang during his meeting with North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong Ho on the sidelines of U.N. General Assembly session.

VOA’s Jeff Seldin contributed to this report.
…

Two key U.S. senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, said Friday that they would vote to confirm the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a speech to the Senate, Collins, a Republican, cited the lack of evidence for the sexual assault claims made against Kavanaugh. She added that her decision should not be understood as a denial of the importance of sexual assault claims.

“Every person man or woman who makes a charge of sexual assault deserves to be heard and treated with respect,” she said.

Democrat Manchin said in a tweet minutes later he would vote yes based on the information available to him, including a recently completed FBI report.

The two votes made Kavanaugh’s confirmation extremely likely; the vote would be 51-49. Even if there were a tie, Vice President Mike Pence could cast the tiebreaking vote to confirm the nomination.

Lawyers’ review

The American Bar Association, meanwhile, issued a statement via email Friday afternoon, addressed to Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the highest-ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, and Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat. 

In the letter, the bar association said it had “new information of a material nature regarding temperament” of Kavanaugh, gathered during his Sept. 27 hearing before the committee. The letter said the new information prompted a “reopening” of the bar association’s evaluation of Kavanaugh, conducted by its Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary.

But the letter said the standing committee did not expect to complete a re-vote prior to the scheduled final Senate vote on the Kavanaugh nomination. It said its original “well-qualified” rating of Kavanaugh would stand.

Kavanaugh has been accused of sexual misconduct by a woman who says he assaulted her at a home in suburban Washington when they were teenagers in the 1980s.

He denies the accusation made by professor Christine Blasey Ford, who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee more than a week ago.

Friday’s procedural vote on the nomination allowed for up to 30 hours of Senate debate ahead of the final vote. The 51-49 decision was largely along party lines, with Manchin the only Democrat to vote in favor of advancing the nomination and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska being the sole Republican to vote against doing so.

Murkowski later told reporters she had not decided whether she would vote for Kavanaugh’s confirmation but suggested she might not.

“This has truly been the most difficult … decision that I’ve ever had to make,” she said. “I believe he’s a good man. It just may be that in my view, he’s not the best man for the court at this time.”

Manchin, who is running for re-election in West Virginia where Trump easily won in 2016, had said the FBI’s supplemental report would help determine how he would cast his final vote.

Senators have been confronted by protesters who oppose the Kavanaugh nomination and police at the U.S. Capitol have arrested hundreds of demonstrators.

President Trump praised the Republican-led Senate Friday, tweeting he was “very proud” it managed to advance the nomination.

Throughout the week, Democrats solidified their caucus’s opposition to Kavanaugh, an appellate judge whose elevation to the Supreme Court could cement a decidedly conservative majority for decades.

North Dakota Democrat Heidi Heitkamp announced she would vote against Kavanaugh. She questioned the nominee’s “temperament, honesty and impartiality,” and said, “Our actions right now are a poignant signal to young girls and women across our country. I will continue to stand up for them.”

Heitkamp currently trails in polls as she runs for re-election in North Dakota, a state Trump won handily in 2016.

Friday’s procedural vote came one day after Senate Republicans voiced their impatience to confirm Kavanaugh, asserting that an FBI report did not corroborate allegations the judge committed sexual assault.

A week ago, the Judiciary Committee sent Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate on the condition that the FBI perform a supplemental background check on him.

Senators were duty-bound not to divulge details of the report, which was made available behind closed doors in a secure room of the Capitol; however, numerous Republicans emerged to tell reporters they saw nothing implicating Kavanaugh in sexual misconduct.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said the FBI was unable to locate “any third parties who could attest to any of these allegations.” He told fellow lawmakers on the Senate floor Friday, “It would be a travesty … if the Senate did not confirm the most qualified nomination in our nation’s history.”

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday on the Senate floor, “I do not see how it’s possible for my colleagues to say with perfect confidence that Judge Kavanaugh has the temperament, independence and credibility to serve on the United States Supreme Court.”

Dianne Feinstein of California, the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, told colleagues Friday she had attended nine Supreme Court nomination hearings during more than 25 years in the Senate, but never one like Kavanaugh’s.

“Never before have we had a Supreme Court nominee where over 90 percent of his record has been hidden from the public and the Senate. Never before have we had a nominee display such flagrant partisanship and open hostility at a hearing. And never before have we had a nominee facing allegations of sexual assault.”

Democrats argued the FBI report had been hampered by limitations placed on investigators by the White House in conjunction with Judiciary Committee Republicans. News reports say neither Ford nor Kavanaugh was interviewed, and several people who claimed to have known the nominee as a student said they were not able to secure an FBI interview.

 

Feinstein Thursday said, “Democrats agreed that the investigation’s scope should be limited. We did not agree that the White House should tie the FBI’s hands.”

White House spokesman Raj Shah said that after the “most comprehensive review of a Supreme Court nominee in history,” the White House is “fully confident” Kavanaugh will be confirmed.

If confirmed, Kavanaugh would replace retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The nine-member court is currently operating with eight justices.

A Kavanaugh confirmation would tip the balance on the Supreme Court to a 5-4 conservative majority.

VOA’s Fern Robinson and Kenneth Schwartz contributed to this report.
…

Two key U.S. senators, Susan Collins of Maine and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, said Friday that they would vote to confirm the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a speech to the Senate, Collins, a Republican, cited the lack of evidence for the sexual assault claims made against Kavanaugh. She added that her decision should not be understood as a denial of the importance of sexual assault claims.

“Every person man or woman who makes a charge of sexual assault deserves to be heard and treated with respect,” she said.

Democrat Manchin said in a tweet minutes later he would vote yes based on the information available to him, including a recently completed FBI report.

The two votes made Kavanaugh’s confirmation extremely likely; the vote would be 51-49. Even if there were a tie, Vice President Mike Pence could cast the tiebreaking vote to confirm the nomination.

Lawyers’ review

The American Bar Association, meanwhile, issued a statement via email Friday afternoon, addressed to Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the highest-ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, and Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat. 

In the letter, the bar association said it had “new information of a material nature regarding temperament” of Kavanaugh, gathered during his Sept. 27 hearing before the committee. The letter said the new information prompted a “reopening” of the bar association’s evaluation of Kavanaugh, conducted by its Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary.

But the letter said the standing committee did not expect to complete a re-vote prior to the scheduled final Senate vote on the Kavanaugh nomination. It said its original “well-qualified” rating of Kavanaugh would stand.

Kavanaugh has been accused of sexual misconduct by a woman who says he assaulted her at a home in suburban Washington when they were teenagers in the 1980s.

He denies the accusation made by professor Christine Blasey Ford, who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee more than a week ago.

Friday’s procedural vote on the nomination allowed for up to 30 hours of Senate debate ahead of the final vote. The 51-49 decision was largely along party lines, with Manchin the only Democrat to vote in favor of advancing the nomination and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska being the sole Republican to vote against doing so.

Murkowski later told reporters she had not decided whether she would vote for Kavanaugh’s confirmation but suggested she might not.

“This has truly been the most difficult … decision that I’ve ever had to make,” she said. “I believe he’s a good man. It just may be that in my view, he’s not the best man for the court at this time.”

Manchin, who is running for re-election in West Virginia where Trump easily won in 2016, had said the FBI’s supplemental report would help determine how he would cast his final vote.

Senators have been confronted by protesters who oppose the Kavanaugh nomination and police at the U.S. Capitol have arrested hundreds of demonstrators.

President Trump praised the Republican-led Senate Friday, tweeting he was “very proud” it managed to advance the nomination.

Throughout the week, Democrats solidified their caucus’s opposition to Kavanaugh, an appellate judge whose elevation to the Supreme Court could cement a decidedly conservative majority for decades.

North Dakota Democrat Heidi Heitkamp announced she would vote against Kavanaugh. She questioned the nominee’s “temperament, honesty and impartiality,” and said, “Our actions right now are a poignant signal to young girls and women across our country. I will continue to stand up for them.”

Heitkamp currently trails in polls as she runs for re-election in North Dakota, a state Trump won handily in 2016.

Friday’s procedural vote came one day after Senate Republicans voiced their impatience to confirm Kavanaugh, asserting that an FBI report did not corroborate allegations the judge committed sexual assault.

A week ago, the Judiciary Committee sent Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate on the condition that the FBI perform a supplemental background check on him.

Senators were duty-bound not to divulge details of the report, which was made available behind closed doors in a secure room of the Capitol; however, numerous Republicans emerged to tell reporters they saw nothing implicating Kavanaugh in sexual misconduct.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said the FBI was unable to locate “any third parties who could attest to any of these allegations.” He told fellow lawmakers on the Senate floor Friday, “It would be a travesty … if the Senate did not confirm the most qualified nomination in our nation’s history.”

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said Friday on the Senate floor, “I do not see how it’s possible for my colleagues to say with perfect confidence that Judge Kavanaugh has the temperament, independence and credibility to serve on the United States Supreme Court.”

Dianne Feinstein of California, the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, told colleagues Friday she had attended nine Supreme Court nomination hearings during more than 25 years in the Senate, but never one like Kavanaugh’s.

“Never before have we had a Supreme Court nominee where over 90 percent of his record has been hidden from the public and the Senate. Never before have we had a nominee display such flagrant partisanship and open hostility at a hearing. And never before have we had a nominee facing allegations of sexual assault.”

Democrats argued the FBI report had been hampered by limitations placed on investigators by the White House in conjunction with Judiciary Committee Republicans. News reports say neither Ford nor Kavanaugh was interviewed, and several people who claimed to have known the nominee as a student said they were not able to secure an FBI interview.

 

Feinstein Thursday said, “Democrats agreed that the investigation’s scope should be limited. We did not agree that the White House should tie the FBI’s hands.”

White House spokesman Raj Shah said that after the “most comprehensive review of a Supreme Court nominee in history,” the White House is “fully confident” Kavanaugh will be confirmed.

If confirmed, Kavanaugh would replace retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The nine-member court is currently operating with eight justices.

A Kavanaugh confirmation would tip the balance on the Supreme Court to a 5-4 conservative majority.

VOA’s Fern Robinson and Kenneth Schwartz contributed to this report.
…

Protesters gathered in Washington Thursday to condemn President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh following allegations of sexual assault. It was a day of high drama on Capitol Hill as senators learned the results of an FBI investigation into Kavanaugh’s background. The Senate Republican leadership accuses the minority Democrats of attempting to derail Kavanaugh’s nomination for solely political reasons. From Washington, VOA’s Jill Craig has more.
…

Protesters gathered in Washington Thursday to condemn President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh following allegations of sexual assault. It was a day of high drama on Capitol Hill as senators learned the results of an FBI investigation into Kavanaugh’s background. The Senate Republican leadership accuses the minority Democrats of attempting to derail Kavanaugh’s nomination for solely political reasons. From Washington, VOA’s Jill Craig has more.
…

Seeking to boost Republican turnout in key Minnesota battlegrounds, President Donald Trump attacked Democrats on Thursday night, arguing that their “rage-fueled resistance” to his Supreme Court nominee would motivate GOP voters this fall.

Speaking before a cheering crowd at a rally in Rochester, Trump praised Judge Brett Kavanaugh, whose nomination has faltered amid accusations of sexual misconduct. Of Democrats, he said, “Their rage-fueled resistance is starting to backfire at a level nobody has ever seen before.”

Added Trump: “Do we love it? We love it. Because people see what’s happening and they don’t like it.”

As Republicans face a tough midterm election cycle, Trump is trying to boost turnout. The GOP is hoping to fend off a Democratic effort to recapture the House of Representatives.

Trump landed in Minneapolis in the afternoon and headed to a fundraiser before traveling to Rochester, friendly territory in the traditionally liberal state, where Republicans are targeting two Democratic districts but playing defense in two GOP-held districts in the Minneapolis suburbs.

‘Radical’ opponents

Stressing the stakes, Trump said, “On November 6, I need your vote, I need your support to stop radical Democrats and elect proud Minnesota Republicans.”

In a sustained attack on Democrats, Trump said they would raise taxes, increase regulations and stall economic gains. He slammed party leaders, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. And he accused the Democrats of desperately grabbing at power, saying, “They want to resist, they want to obstruct, they want to delay, demolish, they want to destroy.”

Outside Washington, the focus still remained on the dramatic nomination process for Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. Trump told reporters he thinks Kavanaugh is “doing very well” as senators weigh a new FBI background report prompted by allegations of sexual misconduct.

Trump earlier tweeted his support for Kavanaugh, who is accused of a sexual assault at a high school party, saying, “Due Process, Fairness and Common Sense are now on trial!” Trump has sought to use the Kavanaugh confirmation conflict to appeal to white men, arguing that the accusations are proof that innocent men could be unfairly targeted.

As Kavanaugh aggressively pushes back against allegations of misconduct, Trump mocked former Sen. Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, for quickly resigning over allegations of improper behavior.

‘Gone so fast’

“Boy, did he fold up like a wet rag, huh?” Trump said at the rally. “He was gone so fast. It was like, ‘Oh, he did something,’ ‘Oh, oh, oh, I resign, I resign, I quit, I quit.’ Wow.”

Trump also criticized the low name recognition of Sen. Tina Smith, who is running to fill the final two years of Franken’s term, and invited Smith’s challenger, state Sen. Karin Housley, onstage to speak.

The outcome in Minnesota could prove critical as Republicans seek to counter Democratic enthusiasm in the midterm elections.

The president campaigned for Republican Jim Hagedorn, who is seeking an open congressional seat in the 1st Congressional District, a Republican-leaning area Democrats have controlled for 12 years. Hagedorn, who came close to unseating the outgoing congressman in 2016, has been an unabashed supporter of Trump and hopes the publicity from the rally will help put him over the top.

Trump also appeared with Rep. Jason Lewis, who is facing a close re-election race in the Minneapolis suburbs. But Republican Rep. Erik Paulsen, who is also fighting to hold a suburban seat, did not attend, underscoring the president’s mixed popularity in the state.

Highlighting the high-stakes judicial fight currently under way, Lewis stressed judges when he spoke, saying, “Minnesota loves your judicial appointments.”

The president’s sinking support in the suburbs has put both lawmakers in a tricky position against well-financed Democrats. But in a new memo, the White House argued that candidates who distance themselves from Trump will suffer this fall. Officials contrasted Lewis’ request to campaign with Trump with Paulsen’s efforts to keep his distance. The White House believes Paulsen’s rejection of Trump will sink his candidacy.

Trump warning: Stick with me

The White House memo acknowledges that Republicans are facing an enthusiasm gap, but suggests this is where Trump can make up the difference — for those candidates willing to take his help. Republicans who don’t talk about Trump or his accomplishments, the White House warns, will make a tough situation a whole lot tougher.

Trump has used campaign rallies to try to boost Republican turnout, encouraging the voters he drew to the polls in 2016 to support more staid, traditional lawmakers. Both parties largely view the 2018 contest as a race to turn out party faithful rather than an effort to attract new voters.

Trump spent much of the rally ticking off what he views as key accomplishments, including jobs and economic gains and exiting the Iran nuclear deal. He also touted ongoing promises, including his pledge to develop a Space Force.

At the conclusion of the hour-plus speech, Trump made an impassioned plea, bemoaning the “Democrat politics of anger, division and destruction” and telling his supporters, “This is your time to choose.”

He added that his rise had been “the greatest movement in the history of our country” and predicted, “We are going to win, win, win.”
…

Seeking to boost Republican turnout in key Minnesota battlegrounds, President Donald Trump attacked Democrats on Thursday night, arguing that their “rage-fueled resistance” to his Supreme Court nominee would motivate GOP voters this fall.

Speaking before a cheering crowd at a rally in Rochester, Trump praised Judge Brett Kavanaugh, whose nomination has faltered amid accusations of sexual misconduct. Of Democrats, he said, “Their rage-fueled resistance is starting to backfire at a level nobody has ever seen before.”

Added Trump: “Do we love it? We love it. Because people see what’s happening and they don’t like it.”

As Republicans face a tough midterm election cycle, Trump is trying to boost turnout. The GOP is hoping to fend off a Democratic effort to recapture the House of Representatives.

Trump landed in Minneapolis in the afternoon and headed to a fundraiser before traveling to Rochester, friendly territory in the traditionally liberal state, where Republicans are targeting two Democratic districts but playing defense in two GOP-held districts in the Minneapolis suburbs.

‘Radical’ opponents

Stressing the stakes, Trump said, “On November 6, I need your vote, I need your support to stop radical Democrats and elect proud Minnesota Republicans.”

In a sustained attack on Democrats, Trump said they would raise taxes, increase regulations and stall economic gains. He slammed party leaders, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. And he accused the Democrats of desperately grabbing at power, saying, “They want to resist, they want to obstruct, they want to delay, demolish, they want to destroy.”

Outside Washington, the focus still remained on the dramatic nomination process for Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. Trump told reporters he thinks Kavanaugh is “doing very well” as senators weigh a new FBI background report prompted by allegations of sexual misconduct.

Trump earlier tweeted his support for Kavanaugh, who is accused of a sexual assault at a high school party, saying, “Due Process, Fairness and Common Sense are now on trial!” Trump has sought to use the Kavanaugh confirmation conflict to appeal to white men, arguing that the accusations are proof that innocent men could be unfairly targeted.

As Kavanaugh aggressively pushes back against allegations of misconduct, Trump mocked former Sen. Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, for quickly resigning over allegations of improper behavior.

‘Gone so fast’

“Boy, did he fold up like a wet rag, huh?” Trump said at the rally. “He was gone so fast. It was like, ‘Oh, he did something,’ ‘Oh, oh, oh, I resign, I resign, I quit, I quit.’ Wow.”

Trump also criticized the low name recognition of Sen. Tina Smith, who is running to fill the final two years of Franken’s term, and invited Smith’s challenger, state Sen. Karin Housley, onstage to speak.

The outcome in Minnesota could prove critical as Republicans seek to counter Democratic enthusiasm in the midterm elections.

The president campaigned for Republican Jim Hagedorn, who is seeking an open congressional seat in the 1st Congressional District, a Republican-leaning area Democrats have controlled for 12 years. Hagedorn, who came close to unseating the outgoing congressman in 2016, has been an unabashed supporter of Trump and hopes the publicity from the rally will help put him over the top.

Trump also appeared with Rep. Jason Lewis, who is facing a close re-election race in the Minneapolis suburbs. But Republican Rep. Erik Paulsen, who is also fighting to hold a suburban seat, did not attend, underscoring the president’s mixed popularity in the state.

Highlighting the high-stakes judicial fight currently under way, Lewis stressed judges when he spoke, saying, “Minnesota loves your judicial appointments.”

The president’s sinking support in the suburbs has put both lawmakers in a tricky position against well-financed Democrats. But in a new memo, the White House argued that candidates who distance themselves from Trump will suffer this fall. Officials contrasted Lewis’ request to campaign with Trump with Paulsen’s efforts to keep his distance. The White House believes Paulsen’s rejection of Trump will sink his candidacy.

Trump warning: Stick with me

The White House memo acknowledges that Republicans are facing an enthusiasm gap, but suggests this is where Trump can make up the difference — for those candidates willing to take his help. Republicans who don’t talk about Trump or his accomplishments, the White House warns, will make a tough situation a whole lot tougher.

Trump has used campaign rallies to try to boost Republican turnout, encouraging the voters he drew to the polls in 2016 to support more staid, traditional lawmakers. Both parties largely view the 2018 contest as a race to turn out party faithful rather than an effort to attract new voters.

Trump spent much of the rally ticking off what he views as key accomplishments, including jobs and economic gains and exiting the Iran nuclear deal. He also touted ongoing promises, including his pledge to develop a Space Force.

At the conclusion of the hour-plus speech, Trump made an impassioned plea, bemoaning the “Democrat politics of anger, division and destruction” and telling his supporters, “This is your time to choose.”

He added that his rise had been “the greatest movement in the history of our country” and predicted, “We are going to win, win, win.”
…

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh writes that he knows he might have been “too emotional” in Senate testimony last week because he says he was “overwhelmingly frustrated.”

Kavanaugh has written an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal  — his first public comments since testifying about the sexual assault allegations made against him.

“Yes, I was emotional last Thursday. I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband, and dad. … I know that my tone was sharp and I said a few things I should not have said,” Kavanaugh writes.

“My hearing testimony was forceful and passionate. That is because I forcefully and passionately denied the allegation against me.”

As senators get ready to vote whether to confirm him to the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh again defended his record as an an appeals court judge, declaring himself “independent and impartial.”

“I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect. I have been known for my courtesy on and off the bench … if confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep an open mind in every case and always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the America rule of law,” he wrote.
…

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh writes that he knows he might have been “too emotional” in Senate testimony last week because he says he was “overwhelmingly frustrated.”

Kavanaugh has written an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal  — his first public comments since testifying about the sexual assault allegations made against him.

“Yes, I was emotional last Thursday. I hope everyone can understand I was there as a son, husband, and dad. … I know that my tone was sharp and I said a few things I should not have said,” Kavanaugh writes.

“My hearing testimony was forceful and passionate. That is because I forcefully and passionately denied the allegation against me.”

As senators get ready to vote whether to confirm him to the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh again defended his record as an an appeals court judge, declaring himself “independent and impartial.”

“I have always treated colleagues and litigants with the utmost respect. I have been known for my courtesy on and off the bench … if confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Supreme Court, I will keep an open mind in every case and always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the America rule of law,” he wrote.
…

The nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill an open seat on the U.S. Supreme Court is moving toward a final vote as early as Saturday.

First though, senators are on Thursday reviewing an FBI report on allegations Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman when both were teenagers and that he exposed himself to another woman during their first year of college.

Kavanaugh has denied the accusations.

The sharp partisan battle over the lifetime appointment to the nine-member court has polarized the U.S. Senate with the majority Republicans accusing Democrats of unnecessarily dragging out the process, while Democrats say Republicans are rushing to confirm Kavanaugh without properly considering the allegations against him.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley said early Thursday the panel had received the FBI probe materials, and that he and ranking Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein had agreed on a process of alternating, equal access for senators from both sides to review the information.​

The FBI report is confidential and senators will be allowed to read it in a special secure room in the Capitol. It is not clear what, if any, of the material will be made public.

Polarized Senate

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said late Wednesday the chamber would be receiving the results of the FBI probe and assured members they would have time to review its contents.

Hours later, White House spokesman Raj Shah said the report was being transmitted to the Senate and that after the “most comprehensive review of a Supreme Court nominee in history,” the White House is “fully confident” Kavanaugh will be confirmed.

The FBI report is confidential, and senators will be allowed to read it in a special secure room in the Capitol. It is not clear what, if any, of the material will be made public.

McConnell announced he will then proceed with what is known as a cloture vote to officially end debate about Kavanaugh’s nomination. That procedural vote could happen as early as Friday morning and set up a final vote potentially Saturday.

Ford, witnesses not interviewed by FBI

Christine Blasey Ford testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, telling lawmakers she was “100 percent certain” it was a drunken Kavanaugh who pinned her down on a bed, groped her, tried to take off her clothes, and put his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams for help. Kavanaugh testified he has never assaulted anyone.

A lawyer for Ford criticized the FBI investigation in a statement late Wednesday, saying it did not include an interview with Ford or others who could back up her testimony.

“We are profoundly disappointed that after the tremendous sacrifice she made in coming forward, those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth,” Ford’s counsel said.

President Donald Trump has defended his nominee and criticized the way the nomination has proceeded. He said Wednesday on Twitter:

Another tweet later in the day mentioned polls and said, “The country is with him all the way!”

Polling

In a poll released Wednesday by NPR, Marist and PBS Newshour, 47 percent of respondents said they had a negative view of Kavanaugh versus 36 percent who said they view the judge positively. Another 18 percent were unsure or had not heard of Kavanaugh.

On another question, 45 percent of respondents said they believe Ford is telling the truth about what happened when the two were in high school, while 33 percent said they believe Kavanaugh.

Overall, 48 percent of respondents said they oppose Kavanaugh’s nomination and 41 percent said they support him joining the Supreme Court.

Three key Republicans

Republicans hold a slight 51-49 majority in the Senate, and with Vice President Mike Pence playing the role of tie-breaker if necessary, they would need a minimum of 50 votes to confirm Kavanaugh.

No Democrat has come out in favor of the judge, and three key Republicans have yet to commit themselves on how they plan to vote

If confirmed, Kavanaugh — an appellate judge and judicial conservative — would replace retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The nine-member court is currently operating with eight justices.
…

The nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill an open seat on the U.S. Supreme Court is moving toward a final vote as early as Saturday.

First though, senators are on Thursday reviewing an FBI report on allegations Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman when both were teenagers and that he exposed himself to another woman during their first year of college.

Kavanaugh has denied the accusations.

The sharp partisan battle over the lifetime appointment to the nine-member court has polarized the U.S. Senate with the majority Republicans accusing Democrats of unnecessarily dragging out the process, while Democrats say Republicans are rushing to confirm Kavanaugh without properly considering the allegations against him.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley said early Thursday the panel had received the FBI probe materials, and that he and ranking Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein had agreed on a process of alternating, equal access for senators from both sides to review the information.​

The FBI report is confidential and senators will be allowed to read it in a special secure room in the Capitol. It is not clear what, if any, of the material will be made public.

Polarized Senate

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said late Wednesday the chamber would be receiving the results of the FBI probe and assured members they would have time to review its contents.

Hours later, White House spokesman Raj Shah said the report was being transmitted to the Senate and that after the “most comprehensive review of a Supreme Court nominee in history,” the White House is “fully confident” Kavanaugh will be confirmed.

The FBI report is confidential, and senators will be allowed to read it in a special secure room in the Capitol. It is not clear what, if any, of the material will be made public.

McConnell announced he will then proceed with what is known as a cloture vote to officially end debate about Kavanaugh’s nomination. That procedural vote could happen as early as Friday morning and set up a final vote potentially Saturday.

Ford, witnesses not interviewed by FBI

Christine Blasey Ford testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, telling lawmakers she was “100 percent certain” it was a drunken Kavanaugh who pinned her down on a bed, groped her, tried to take off her clothes, and put his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams for help. Kavanaugh testified he has never assaulted anyone.

A lawyer for Ford criticized the FBI investigation in a statement late Wednesday, saying it did not include an interview with Ford or others who could back up her testimony.

“We are profoundly disappointed that after the tremendous sacrifice she made in coming forward, those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth,” Ford’s counsel said.

President Donald Trump has defended his nominee and criticized the way the nomination has proceeded. He said Wednesday on Twitter:

Another tweet later in the day mentioned polls and said, “The country is with him all the way!”

Polling

In a poll released Wednesday by NPR, Marist and PBS Newshour, 47 percent of respondents said they had a negative view of Kavanaugh versus 36 percent who said they view the judge positively. Another 18 percent were unsure or had not heard of Kavanaugh.

On another question, 45 percent of respondents said they believe Ford is telling the truth about what happened when the two were in high school, while 33 percent said they believe Kavanaugh.

Overall, 48 percent of respondents said they oppose Kavanaugh’s nomination and 41 percent said they support him joining the Supreme Court.

Three key Republicans

Republicans hold a slight 51-49 majority in the Senate, and with Vice President Mike Pence playing the role of tie-breaker if necessary, they would need a minimum of 50 votes to confirm Kavanaugh.

No Democrat has come out in favor of the judge, and three key Republicans have yet to commit themselves on how they plan to vote

If confirmed, Kavanaugh — an appellate judge and judicial conservative — would replace retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The nine-member court is currently operating with eight justices.
…

Tension over changes to Alaska’s famed oil-wealth checks hangs over this year’s governor’s race, threatening Gov. Bill Walker’s chances for re-election.

For decades, residents have shared in the state’s oil wealth, eagerly anticipating the much-hyped reveal of the annual check’s amount and dreaming about how they’d use their portion. The checks go to every man, woman and child who meets residency requirements, peaking at $2,072 in 2015.

But since 2016, the excitement has been muted and, for some, replaced with anger as Walker and state legislators capped the payout in response to what had become a multibillion-dollar state budget deficit.

This year’s $1,600 check, or $6,400 for a family of four, being distributed Thursday is nothing to sniff it. But the payout, by some revised estimates, would have been about $2,980, or $11,920 for a family of four, if it had not been capped.

Budget deficit

Walker, an independent elected in 2014, stands by his decision to halve the amount available for checks in 2016, when oil was in the $40-a-barrel range and lawmakers were deadlocked on addressing a deficit deepened by low prices. But it could cost him re-election.

While some Alaskans defend his decision as politically courageous and a way to preserve the program for the future, others have cast him as a thief. The check, along with crime and the economy, are major issues in this year’s governor’s race.

There are people who say they’re upset, “but let’s see if they vote,” said Juanita Cassellius, who is with a group that supports putting the original formula for calculating the dividend into the state constitution.

Sacrosanct checks

The annual dividend checks were widely seen as sacrosanct until Walker halved them in 2016, a move upheld by Alaska’s highest court. That opened the door for lawmakers, who had burned through billions of dollars in savings before this year deciding to use earnings from the oil-wealth fund, the Alaska Permanent Fund, to help pay for state government. Dividends also are paid with fund earnings.

Lawmakers capped the check at $1,100 last year. This year’s dividend amount was set by what could pass the politically divided state House, not by the formula in law, which some argued would be fiscally reckless to adhere to.

The dividend program’s future remains unsettled. As it stands, the check will have to compete with schools, roads, troopers and other services paid using fund earnings.

Capitalizing on the angst

Walker’s main opponents, Republican Mike Dunleavy and Democrat Mark Begich, are seeking to capitalize on the angst, with Begich saying he’d prioritize efforts to get before voters the question of whether to enshrine the dividend in the constitution.

“You have to get that Permanent Fund Dividend issue resolved one way or the other,” or it will remain a source of political argument, he said.

In recent years, the nest-egg permanent fund, which was seeded with oil money and has grown through investments, has done well. As of June 30, its total value was nearly $65 billion, about $16.4 billion of which was in the spendable earnings reserve.

The fear some have is that politicians, once reluctant to tap fund earnings, won’t be shy anymore.

No state sales, income tax

While oil prices have moderated, fund earnings are expected to play an ongoing role in paying for government services. Alaska has no state sales or personal income tax, though Begich and Walker say additional revenue of some kind is needed. Walker tried unsuccessfully to get a range of taxes passed. Dunleavy has favored reducing spending.

Dunleavy, a former state senator, supports a full dividend payout and said the public should get to weigh in before any changes are made to the formula.

Begich, a former U.S. senator, wants to put billions of dollars from fund earnings into the fund’s principal, where it can’t be touched. Lawmakers can spend fund earnings with a simple majority vote. The principal is constitutionally protected.

Begich supports withdrawing a limited amount, based on a percentage of the fund’s market value, with part going for checks and part going for education.

The plan approved by legislators this year calls for limited withdrawals based on a five-year average of the fund’s market value. But it left open for future debate how much should go to government and how much should go toward checks.

Sustainable

Walker said he’s open to putting the dividend in the constitution. He likes the idea of a guaranteed minimum amount but wouldn’t want to see a cap. 

“Whatever it is, the amount has to be sustainable,” he said.

He notes that as recently as 2012, the dividend was $878. The historical average, before 2016, was about $1,150, based on a rolling five-year average of the fund’s performance.

Mark Choate, a Juneau attorney, said it’s easy for candidates to tell voters they’ll put more money in their pockets, but “that’s not realistic.” The self-described progressive supports Walker.

“When people say, ‘Oh, gee whiz, government’s not spending wisely,’ which parts of government don’t you want?” Choate said, adding: “It’s frustrating to me to see people be so simplistic about it.”
…

Hundreds of vigils were held across the United States Wednesday with marchers hoping to persuade senators to vote against confirming Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Reports say the FBI has completed its latest investigation into allegations Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Christine Blasey Ford at a party when they were in high school.

Two other women also accuse Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. The judge denies all the allegations made against him. 

Senators are expected to begin reviewing the FBI report  Thursday in a secure room in the Capitol complex. They are not supposed to divulge the contents of the agency’s background reports.

 

Late Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell set a vote for Friday on limiting debate on on Kavanaugh’s nomination, moving the Senate toward a potential confirmation roll call over the weekend. 

With Republicans holding a thin 51-49 majority and five senators, including three Republicans, not committed to approving Kavanaugh, the conservative jurist’s prospects of Senate confirmation remained murky.

In a statement Wednesday night, lawyers for Christine Blasey Ford say the additional FBI background investigation didn’t include interviewing Ford or the witnesses they say corroborate her testimony. 

Ford’s lawyers go on to say they are “profoundly disappointed” that those directing the probe “were not interested in seeking the truth.”

Also Wednesday, the National Council of Churches, a coalition of 38 denominations, released a statement saying Kavanaugh should withdraw his nomination. The group’s statement said he showed “extreme partisan bias,” showing that he lacks the temperament to serve on the nation’s highest court, during his testimony last week before the Senate Judicial Committee.

More than 650 law professors from across the country also signed a letter, which will be sent to the Senate on Thursday in The New York Times, urging lawmakers to reject Kavanaugh’s nomination. Their letter said, he “displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for election to the highest court of the land.”

No Democrat has come out in favor of the judge and three key Republicans have yet to commit themselves on how they plan to vote. 

Those three Republicans, along with a number of other senators, have criticized President Donald Trump over his remarks at a campaign rally mocking Ford.

“His comments were just plain wrong,” Maine’s Susan Collins said Wednesday.

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski called the remarks “wholly inappropriate and in my view unacceptable.” 

Arizona’s Jeff Flake — who insisted on a weeklong delay in a confirmation vote so the FBI can have another investigation — called Trump’s remarks “appalling.”

Addressing thousands of supporters at a Mississippi rally, Trump gave his own re-enactment of Ford’s responses to questions at last week’s Senate hearing where she testified that Kavanaugh assaulted her.

“I had one beer!” he said, impersonating Ford. “How did you get home? I don’t remember. How did 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!”

“Upstairs, downstairs where was it? I don’t know,” he said in front of laughing supporters.

Ford told Senate Judiciary Committee that, despite some memory lapses, she was “100 percent certain” it was a drunken Kavanaugh who pinned her to a bed, groped her, and put his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams for help. Kavanaugh testified he has never assaulted anyone and complained he is the victim of a “political hit” to destroy his reputation.

White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Trump was merely stating the facts of the case and remains confident in his nominee. 

​Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, blasted the president’s mockery of Ford as “reprehensible, beneath the office of the presidency, and beneath common decency from one person to another.”

If confirmed, Kavanaugh — an appellate judge and judicial conservative — would replace retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The nine-member court is currently operating with eight justices.

Richard Green contributed to this report.
…

As U.S. voters prepare to go to the polls for the November 6 midterm elections, federal, state and local officials are preparing, too. But whereas many voters are considering which candidates to support, government officials are doing all they can to make sure everyone who is eligible can cast a ballot and that those votes will be counted correctly.

Fears among many U.S. intelligence and security officials have been growing, dating back to before the 2016 U.S. presidential election when the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security accused Russia of orchestrating a campaign to hack into the emails of U.S. political organizations and selectively release them to the public.

“These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the U.S. election process,” the joint statement said.

Following President Donald Trump’s election that November, the top three U.S. intelligence agencies issued a declassified report, accusing Russia of executing an unprecedented influence campaign “to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process.”

The January 2017 report from the CIA, the FBI and NSA also assessed that “[President Vladimir] Putin and the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible.”

But the report said Russia’s efforts to use disinformation to sway voters was only one problem. Another was the access Russia got, and maintained, to U.S. state and local electoral systems — though officials concluded Russia was not able to access systems that would have allowed it to physically change vote totals.

More recent U.S. intelligent assessments indicate that in the run-up to this year’s midterm election, the threats have expanded.

In July, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats ominously declared the “warning lights are blinking red.”

Here are five things to know about the dangers to the electoral system and what the U.S. is doing about them:

Are the Russians interfering again in the U.S. election process?

Yes. “We continue to see a pervasive message campaign by Russia to try to weaken and divide the United States,” Coats told reporters during a White House briefing in August.

Coats previously described Russia’s efforts as “undeniable,” accusing Moscow at the annual Aspen Security Conference in July of “trying to undermine our basic values, divide us with our allies.”

But just how much Russia is doing to undermine the upcoming elections remains a question.

“We’re not seeing the targeting of the actual state and local election systems that we saw in 2016 right now,” Jeanette Manfra, the Department of Homeland Security’s assistant secretary for cybersecurity, said at the July security conference.

Since then, multiple intelligence and security officials have reiterated that the pace and scope of Russian activities do not match their 2016 efforts.

Microsoft has said hackers, using tactics similar to what Russia has used in the past, targeted the campaigns of at least three candidates running for Congress.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Democrat from Missouri, announced that suspected Russian hackers had targeted her campaign. Two Republican think tanks, the Hudson Institute and the International Republican Institute, also said they appear to have been targeted.

Are other countries following Russia’s lead and getting into the game this year?

Senior U.S. officials say they are “deeply concerned” about the growing use of influence operations, pointing to countries like China, Iran and North Korea as the biggest culprits after Russia.

Trump has been even more explicit, accusing Beijing of “attempting to interfere in our upcoming 2018 election, coming up in November, against my administration.”

China denies the charges. Still, a growing number of U.S. intelligence and security officials warn that Beijing has the capabilities to do as much, if not more, than Russia did in 2016.

There also is evidence Iran has been trying to expand its influence operations. In September, social media giants Facebook and Twitter announced they had removed hundreds of pages and accounts linked to an Iranian-based campaign that targeted the U.S. as well as other countries.

What are state election officials and political parties doing to protect against the hacking of election machinery?

All 50 U.S. states are working with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to help harden their election infrastructures against attacks.

Every state, as well as almost 1,000 local jurisdictions, has enrolled in the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC), to make it easier to share information about threats.

The federal government has also made an additional $380 million in grants available to state officials to help improve election-related cybersecurity, purchase new voting equipment or improve voter registration systems. Organizations for state officials, like the National Conference of State Legislatures, have also helped pool resources and take advantage of best practices. Several states have also passed new laws to improve election cybersecurity.

But the relationship between the states and the federal government has been uneasy, with some state officials voicing concerns that the Department of Homeland Security was going too far in asserting authority over state and local elections. Still, Homeland Security Secretary Kristjen Nielsen has expressed confidence about reducing the “trust deficit.”

“We have made tremendous strides,” Nielsen said, though she added states would benefit from consistent funding for ongoing security improvements.

What is the federal government doing to try to foil foreign meddling in the election process?

Officials have been working on several fronts to secure the upcoming vote from attacks.

In September, the White House unveiled a new National Cyber Strategy, promising a more aggressive approach in order to deter any sort of cyberattack or intrusion.

“We’re not just on defense,” National Security Advisor John Bolton said. “We’re going to do a lot of things offensively, and I think our adversaries need to know that.”

President Trump also signed an executive order promising to seek retribution, using sanctions and a range of other penalties, against any person, group or country assessed to have meddled in the election.

“We are engaged every single day,” U.S. Cyber Command’s Gen. Paul Nakasone said in September, though he refused to share any specifics.

The U.S. has also tried to hold Russia accountable for its efforts to meddle in the 2016 election, indicting 12 Russians affiliated with the country’s GRU intelligence agency for hacking into Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic Party.

At the same time, the Department of Homeland Security has been working with all 50 U.S. states to harden the country’s election infrastructure against possible attacks. Those efforts include information sharing and analysis, and deploying network intrusion sensors that can help detect attacks in real time.

DHS said 90 percent of Americans will be voting in areas covered by these sensors.

Will the 2018 midterm elections be secure?

U.S. officials say the election infrastructure is secure and that Americans should trust that their votes will count.

“We currently have no indication that a foreign advisory intends to disrupt our election infrastructure,” Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen said, though she cautioned U.S. adversaries are unlikely to give up altogether.

“We’re constantly on alert,” she said. “We know they have the capability and we know they have the will.”

But protecting and securing U.S. election systems is just part of the challenge. Intelligence officials warn stopping disinformation campaigns is far more difficult because countries like Russia, China and Iran are able to take advantage of social media and U.S. laws that protect freedom of expression.

Government officials have been working with social media companies, like Facebook and Twitter, to remove accounts used by trolls and bots to spread propaganda and false information.

The companies also say they have been more active.

Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg told lawmakers in September that the company is “blocking millions of attempts to register false accounts each and every day” and has been “making progress on fake news.”

Still, U.S. intelligence officials said they have no way of knowing when or if one bit of disinformation will cause an individual to change how he or she is going to vote.
…

As U.S. senators await the result of an FBI investigation and prepare for a potential final vote on President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, Trump used part of a political rally to mock a woman who has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her.

The FBI investigation was launched Friday, one day after Christine Blasey Ford told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Kavanaugh assaulted her at a high school party. Kavanaugh angrily denied the charges hours later and accused Democrats of orchestrating a “political hit” against him.

In front of a crowd of supporters Tuesday night in Mississippi, Trump gave an apparent re-enactment of Ford’s testimony, mockingly portraying what he described as holes in her testimony.

“How did you get home? ‘I don’t remember.’ How did you get there? ‘I don’t remember,'” Trump said.

Ford told the Senate Judiciary Committee she was “100 percent certain” it was a drunken Kavanaugh who pinned her down on a bed, groped her, tried to take off her clothes, and put his hand over her mouth to muffle her screams for help. Kavanaugh testified he has never assaulted anyone.

Ford’s lawyer, Michael Bromwich, called Trump’s attack Tuesday “vicious, vile and soulless.”

“Is it any wonder that she was terrified to come forward, and that other sexual assault survivors are as well? She is a remarkable profile in courage. He is a profile in cowardice,” Bromwich wrote on Twitter.

Earlier Tuesday, Senate Republicans and Democrats sparred over the ongoing FBI investigation, which is expected to be completed by Friday.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the confirmation vote will occur once senators of both parties have a chance to review the FBI’s conclusions.

“What I can tell you with certainty is that we’ll have an FBI report this week and we’ll have a vote this week,” McConnell told reporters.

Democrats, meanwhile, demanded that the White House divulge its instructions to the FBI in ordering the investigation, that the FBI’s report be made public, and that the bureau’s lead investigators brief senators about their their findings.

“We need to be briefed by the FBI, by the agent in charge,” Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said. “The FBI must not be handcuffed, and their results should be made public.”

In the days since the FBI probe began, one of the nominee’s former classmates at Yale University issued a statement alleging that, as a student, Kavanaugh was “a frequent drinker and a heavy drinker” who often became “belligerent and aggressive” during his binges. 

On Monday, President Trump told reporters the FBI had the authority to interview anyone it desired, pushing back against charges by Senate Democrats that the White House is limiting the scope of the investigation.

At the Capitol, Schumer said questions surrounding Kavanaugh extend beyond sexual assault and now encompass his truthfulness and judicial temperament.

“It’s hard to believe what Judge Kavanaugh swore under oath,” Schumer said. “He sure didn’t show the demeanor of a judge at the hearing.”

Republicans accused Democrats of attempting to destroy the nominee’s reputation for political gain.

“[Democrats] will not be satisfied unless they have brought down Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination,” McConnell said. “The floodgates of mud and muck opened entirely on Brett Kavanaugh and his family.”

WATCH: Senators split on Kavanaugh

​”It’s not fair to Judge Kavanaugh to string this matter along further,” Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas said. “This has become a national embarrassment.”

Democrats countered that brief delays in voting on Kavanaugh pale in comparison to Republicans refusing to consider former President Barack Obama’s final Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland, for most of 2016.

Republicans hold a 51-49 Senate majority heading into next month’s midterm elections that will determine which political party controls both houses of Congress.

So far, no Democrat has announced support for Kavanaugh and no Republican has declared opposition to him.

Richard Green and Kenneth Schwartz contributed to this report.
…