I am responding to the newspaper’s Oct. 5 editorial (Page A6) asking Sen. Susan Collins to vote “no” on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.
You failed to reference Kavanaugh’s outstanding 28-year career as both jurist and counsel to President George W. Bush. You assigned credibility to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s assault claim, which lacks any direct evidence. You use Kavanaugh’s Sept. 27 testimony as proof of a lack of judicial temperament, choosing to ignore universal support if not acclaim for decades of notable and respected judicial temperament.
The arguments against confirming Kavanaugh were based on innuendo, unproven accusations and ideological opposition. The arguments for his confirmation were based on his actual track record, near-universal peer and expert support and the FBI.
Geoffrey Emanuel
Falmouth
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.