# data[].attributes.headline
Susan Collins in her speech to the Senate about Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court wants the Senate to vote to approve his nomination because of his current character as an exemplary public servant and outstanding record as a judge and hopes to unite the political parties and stop the corruptive divisiveness.

# data[].attributes.subject
Susan Collins in her speech to the Senate about Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court wants the Senate to vote to approve his nomination because of his current character as an exemplary public servant and outstanding record as a judge and hopes to unite the political parties and stop the corruptive divisiveness.

# data[].attributes.body
In her speech, more specifically in paragraphs 10-12  Susan Collins recognizes Kavanaugh as a qualifying nominee to serve as a judge for the supreme court. Doing so, she provides a description of Kavanaugh's past commendable actions and accolades. Collins states "The American Bar Association gave him its highest possible rating." She points out that his past reviews shows that he meets the high standards of a judge. In addition, Collins provides reasoning that diminishes apposing perspectives. She mentions, "In cases in which the facts are unclear, they would argue that the question should be resolve in of the nominee." Collins effectively highlights that there isn't sufficient evidence against Kavanaugh, and that regardless the dispute will be solved in his favor. Collins presents her argument confidently while being reasonably.

# data[].attributes.headline
Bernardo, Eduardo, Vanessa, liliana     

# data[].attributes.subject
Bernardo, Eduardo, Vanessa, liliana     

# data[].attributes.body
hi

# data[].attributes.body
Through paragraphs 20 to 25, Susan Collins looks to clarify that she is against sexual assault, but that she is in favor of Kavanaugh being approved as a supreme court justice as she looks to promote the message that the true injustice that took place here was not only Christine Ford being possibly assaulted, but that such a case became public without her consult. She does this by sympathizing with Christine Ford An example of the personal experiences she described is, "Many were total strangers who told me their heart-wrenching stories for the first time in their lives. Some were friends that I had known for decades... I had no idea that they had been the victims of sexual assault." By sharing these personal experiences from people in her life who had gone through sexual assault, Susan is able to highlight the injustice committed to Christine Ford who seemingly became a victim of sexual assault due to Kavanaugh. In addition, the fact that she informs the audience that she was shocked about certain peers informing her about being sexually assaulted, seemingly emphasizes that they kept this type of information very secluded and that telling it to a close friend like her was already a devastating, and overwhelming task. This makes you feel even more sympathetic for Christine as deceleration of her being assaulted became public.

# data[].attributes.body
In paragraphs 7-10 Susan Collins dispels any doubts that the senators and public may have on Kavanaugh over gay marriage and pro-choice. She refutes this by using Kavanaugh's own opinion concerning different supreme court cases.  One example is when she mentioned the case in which the Supreme Court in Brown v. The Board of Education overruled Plessy v. Ferguson. Collins included Kavanaugh thoughts on that, "someone who believes that the importance of precedent has been rooted in the Constitution would follow long-established precedent, except in those rare circumstances where a decision is grievously wrong".  This is used to further show the beliefs of Kavanaugh and how it matches popular necessity of precedent in all but extreme situations. She corrects Kavanaugh's rumored beliefs to further persuade the senate to vote to approve his nomination.

# data[].attributes.body
In paragraphs 1-3, Collins uses scholarly diction to create a judgmental tone to admonish those who oppose Kavanaugh without knowing who he truly is and to introduce both of the argument sides, the pro and con. The pro being that he should be elected to become a judge and those who oppose him becoming judge because of what happened years ago.  She states "… special interest groups whip their followers into a frenzy.." (paragraph 2) The specific use of the word “frenzy” comes with the negative connotation of “irrational or wild behavior”. She’s criticizing those who oppose him merely because of his party or who has nominated him, and those who spread blatant misinformed rumors with the hopes of ruining his chances of winning. This creates the judgmental tone with the purpose of exposing most of Kavanaugh’s opponents and convincing the Senate to see them in a negative light. She then goes on to explain how she has talked with Kavanaugh herself several times. This builds her credibility because unlike the opposing side, she has actually taken the time to get to know him.

# data[].attributes.body
In paragraphs 6-8, Susan Collins takes into consideration the criticism on the Kavanaugh nomination and she then counter argues the criticism. In paragraph 7, she counter argues a criticism of Kavanaugh that people think he would favor the president if he's involved in criminal prosecution, or civil liability while in office. Then she refutes that by stating his position to make a law to protect presidents from further prosecutions. As she states in paragraph 8, "Supreme Court Justices have not hesitated to rule against the president who have nominated them." She then is comparing Kavanaugh's case with a case that has occurred in U.S history. Such as President Nixon's case where his case went to the Supreme Court and the three judges that he appointed voted against him. Giving afurth that rejects the claims made by the people  who believe that Kavanaugh would favor the involvement of president Donald Trump in future cases.

# data[].attributes.headline
Collins closes her speech reminding her audience of the disunity that is tearing apart our nation and that the nation must remember the core values we have in common.     She blames the internet for furthering the polarization between parties and alludes to the Constitution and it's founding fathers who would be "alarmed" at our current state, having drafted the preamble to the Constitution that was to ensure a "perfect union." She closes with a reiteration of Kavanaug's exemplary qualifications instilling a hopeful tone that his confirmation will stop this divide in the Supreme Court and ends with  her affirmative vote.

# data[].attributes.subject
Collins closes her speech reminding her audience of the disunity that is tearing apart our nation and that the nation must remember the core values we have in common.     She blames the internet for furthering the polarization between parties and alludes to the Constitution and it's founding fathers who would be "alarmed" at our current state, having drafted the preamble to the Constitution that was to ensure a "perfect union." She closes with a reiteration of Kavanaug's exemplary qualifications instilling a hopeful tone that his confirmation will stop this divide in the Supreme Court and ends with  her affirmative vote.

# data[].attributes.body
In paragraphs 13 through 16, Susan Collins narrates the testimonies presented by Christine Blasey Ford and her friends in order to show that the evidence does not add up in the accusations against Kavanaugh and that they are not reliable enough to prevent Kavanaugh from being nominated to the Supreme Court. The testimonies include that one of her friends, PJ Smyth, "denied that he was there," Leland Keyser "does not remember that party," and that Mark Judge denied that "he witnessed an assault,"(paragraph 14).  The people who were at the party don't even remember that night and the evidence presented do not lead to the conclusion that Kavanaugh was the one that assaulted Ford. This leads Collins to believe that these allegations against Kavanaugh "fail to meet the more likely than not standard,"(paragraph 15).  Proffesor Ford's evidence is not concrete which shows that there really is no reason why Kavanaugh should be denied acceptance to the Supreme Court.  The claims made by the testimonies  should not be put into question because there is no further evidence beyond these claims.  Ford herself does not even fully remember what happened that night and if the claims that were presented do not prove Kavanaugh guilty then there should be no further investigation because it proves his innocence.  The testimonies that Collins narrated in her speech do not give specific details of that day and some can't remember the event which comes to show that Kavanaugh's innocence is in some extent proven because there is no reliable evidence against him.