Kavanaugh hearing divides US media

US media have given sharply contrasting reactions to Thursday's dramatic session of the Senate committee overseeing the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

Some commentators praised Christine Blasey Ford for her testimony alleging Mr Kavanaugh assaulted her 36 years ago. He strongly denies the claims.

But others said the hearing - which was often heated and emotional - had shown US partisan politics at its worst.

The New York Times described Dr Ford as calm and dignified and said Brett Kavanaugh was volatile and belligerent.

"Judge Kavanaugh's defiant fury might be understandable coming from someone who believes himself innocent of the grotesque charges he's facing. Yet it was also evidence of an unsettling temperament in a man trying to persuade the nation of his judicial demeanour."

It said there was no reason why the committee should vote on the nomination before the FBI could do a proper investigation of the claims against Mr Kavanaugh - made by Dr Ford and three other women.

"The Senate, and the American people, need to know the truth, or as close an approximation as possible, before deciding whether Judge Kavanaugh should get a lifetime seat on the nation's highest court," it added.

In The New Republic, Matt Ford said Mr Kavanaugh had undermined his credibility by launching such a vitriolic attack on the Democrats.

The Wall Street Journal called Thursday's hearing "an embarrassment that should have never happened" and said Mr Kavanaugh was right to describe the process as a "disgrace".

In an opinion piece entitled "Confirm Brett Kavanaugh" it said Democrats were trying to push a confirmation vote past the mid-term elections. It said a rejection of Mr Kavanaugh would bring dishonour to the Senate.

"It will validate the ambush and smear politics that Democrats are using. And it will turn Supreme Court nominations over to the justice of the social-media mob and the politics of accusation. It's time for Senators to stand up and confirm Brett Kavanaugh."

The Washington Times, meanwhile, described the confirmation hearings as "a circus".

"Whether you are a man or a woman, a Democrat or a Republican, a conservative or a liberal, we can all agree that this place has become a sewer of lies, a cesspool of indiscriminate human destruction. All in the name of a blood sport called partisan politics, played by the most dishonest vipers ever found under the earth," it said in a hard-hitting opinion article.

Calls for a more thorough investigation of the accusations were made by the Washington Post. It said Americans could only watch Thursday's proceedings with sadness.

Arguing for a vote to be postponed, it said: "In truth, there is still plenty of time. Any deadline has been artificially imposed by the Republican majority for purely partisan reasons, a majority that was happy to leave a Supreme Court chair vacant for most of 2016. As we have said repeatedly, the Senate still has not been given access to all relevant documents, let alone fully checked out Ms Ford's allegation."

It added: "It would be irresponsible for Republicans to insist on an immediate vote. If they do, the responsible vote must be no."

Writing in the Washington Examiner, Nicole Russell says there are holes in Dr Ford's testimony and although she may be in anguish, "her story does not seem to implicate Kavanaugh in any way beyond her words".

However, Dr Ford was "extraordinarily courageous", writes Frida Ghitis for CNN, and had pushed through her fear to address the Senate committee.

She said the hearing had seen "the mask ripped off the Republican Party... and exposed as an accomplice in efforts to preserve some of the most pernicious forms of sexism".