Dems Use the Kavanaugh Process to Destroy Americans’ Most Fundamental Rights

Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley is a great American and a fine senator. With the notable exception of his destructive obsession over preserving the ethanol subsidies and mandates that benefit his state’s corn farmers but distort all manner of markets and ruin thousands of engines every year, he is right on pretty much every issue and has been a stalwart warrior for truth, justice and what DC Comics used to admit was the American Way.

But even this great American has found himself treading on very thin ice in his ongoing cowtowing to the demands of the mendacious Democrats who sit on the Senate Judiciary Committee. To Grassley’s credit, he has held firm in denying the utterly dishonest demands from the Judiciary Ds and Christine Ford’s lawyers that the FBI investigate her transparently false claim of being assaulted by a teenage Brett Kavanaugh 36 years ago when they were both in high school. But at the same time, Grassley tread on very dangerous ground by agreeing to delay his Committee’s scheduled vote this week and offer the accuser a special hearing next Monday.

Ms. Ford is a possible witness in a confirmation process, nothing more. She does not become someone endowed with special rights who gets to make special demands simply because she claims, without offering any evidence at all, something bad happened to her at a party 36 years ago. She has no special status to demand an FBI investigation take place on her whims, nor does she get to negotiate the terms of her possible appearance before a congressional committee, the latest demand which is being reported this afternoon by the fake news hacks at the New York Times.

Ms. Ford is an accuser. Our society is based on – indeed, our Constitution specifically and unambiguously demands – the principle that a defendant have the absolute right to face his or her accuser and hear the charges under oath, an oath that of necessity carries with it harsh penalties should the accuser lie. The adherence to this fundamental principle of law is not negotiable in any way if we are going to remain a free, constitutional republic.

Sadly, it is this fundamental principle of law that the Democrat Party and its propaganda arm in the fake news media is using the #MeToo movement to assault. Everything about the Kavanaugh confirmation process, every despicable tactic employed by the Democrats related to it, every false narrative about the nominee promoted by the fake news media, have been designed to undermine the fundamental legal rights of the accused.

Because Ms. Ford is making a claim of sexual assault, Democrats now demand not just that she be heard, but that she be believed out of hand despite the unarguable fact that she has presented zero credible evidence that anything took place at all. It is blindingly obvious that her coming forward is nothing more or less than a tactic to force an open-ended delay in the process, so that the vote on confirmation might be delayed until after the mid-term elections.

Even Ms. Ford’s memory “lapses” are clearly designed to ensure that Judge Kavanaugh cannot quickly prove she’s lying. She can’t remember the date of the incident – if she did, Kavanaugh might well be able to prove he was in some other city on that day. She can’t remember at whose home the party was held – if she could, Kavanaugh might be able to find the owner of the home, who might well say he never held any such party. She can’t remember who she came to the party with, or who she left with – if she could, Kavanaugh might well be able to find those people, who would no doubt deny they did any such thing.

Back during the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill fiasco, Democrats and their media agents became fond of claiming that Hill’s tales had “the ring of truth” to them. That wasn’t true, but it was the talking point they all used at the time.

There is not a single aspect about Ms. Ford’s story – or the manner in which it was rolled out to the public by Dianne Feinstein and the Democrats – that has the “ring” of anything but a highly-calculated effort to deny Judge Kavanaugh his fundamental rights as an American and to delay the process for no legitimate reason.

If Sen. Grassley and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell concede to Ms. Ford’s latest illegitimate demand for special treatment she has no right to and has not earned, they are conceding to further undermining of the basic rights of the accused that are such a fundamental foundation of our entire society. They simply must not do this.

I posted this on a liberal site. I might as well do it here:

To quote Ratatouille, “let me serve up a fresh batch of perspective”:

I’ve looked at this from both sides. Whenever I try to work out a “he said, she said” I put myself in both people’s shoes. Here is where I have a problem here:
1. She remembered the event in 2012, 30 years after the event, but applied no names to it. This means that that revelation is a completely separate thing from the revelation we are now getting. The new revelation is along the lines of “you know that thing I said happened? Well, I just remembered Kavanaugh did it. I didn’t remember it when he was being confirmed for lower courts but now I remember.”
2. By her own admission she told nobody at the time, so there are not even any witnesses to corroborate via “hearsay”.
3. She cannot remember the day.
4. She cannot remember the place.
5. She cannot remember how she got there.
6. She cannot remember how she got home.
7. This means there is really nothing that can be investigated. All that can happen is to wait for those who were there (assuming it happened) to come forward and corroborate her story. If that shoe drops, so be it. I’ll change my position.
8. All three of the players she claims were there have flatly denied it.
9. Women that actually dated him at that time say her claims are contrary to his personality and actions with them.
10. Women and men that have known him since then and are still his friends today (dozens) have signed a letter and, more importantly, been interviewed to amplify the letter regarding the ridiculousness of the claim against him, based on their lifetime of experience with him.
11. He has passed six BRUTAL FBI background checks and not a peep of any activity like this at any time in his past has come up.

And ignore these if you want, but I think they are icing on the cake:
12. The timing is simply inappropriate. I don’t believe in coincidences.
13. DiFi herself didn’t want to bring this forward but her hand was forced.
14. Polygraph results are not allowed in a courtroom for a reason.
15. She hired an attorney and took a polygraph at a time she was assured she would remain anonymous. Why?
16. She took her polygraph in “friendly territory”. For all we know she tried it ten times before she passed.
17. The high school yearbook pages from 82-84 have been scrubbed. Fortunately, it looks like someone was on this fast enough to get some good screen prints first: https://cultofthe1st.blogspot.com/20...school_19.html

Now, some other important notes:
1. “Why would he/she lie” is never a good reason to believe a person is telling the truth. Tawana Brawley comes to mind. But ask anyone that has ever dealt with human beings on a daily basis and they will tell you that people have all sorts of reasons for lying, most of which only they are aware of.
2. If she is lying, what would it take to convince a reasonable person that she is?
3. We’re talking about repressed memories here. I have some experience in that arena. It is quite possible that this event never happened and yet she is positive, to the core of her being, that it did.
4. What is a man’s reputation and future worth? I had a friend at Microsoft that was accused of sexual harassment. It got very ugly and I figured he needed to polish up his resume. This particular woman was mean, vindictive, and a true control freak in meetings and on projects. I thought he was toast. The company did an investigation (took months) and he was completely exonerated. In a civil society we don’t destroy a man with an impeccable history and loving family on the whim of believing utterly unsupported allegations from a person who can’t even remember when or where the event took place. YMMV
5. I don’t think this point can be ignored: It was 36 years ago and it is an accusation of a drunk teenager feeling up another drunk teenager and laughing at the time. This is not murder. It’s not rape. It’s not even shoplifting. Surely there are one or two people in this thread that remember their teenage years and didn’t spend them at a nunnery.

So, what are we left with? Pretend all other facts are the same but the accuser is someone Barak Obama went to high school with and the accused is Barak Obama. Does that change anyone’s mind? Would you like to see him destroyed over such claims?

The truth of the charges alleged by Ms. Ford against Judge Kavenaugh cannot actually matter. After all, it will never be clear that the charges are true - and it will never be clear that they are false. Indeed it is tempting to suspect that the charges are crafted precisely to be as noxious-sounding as possible without risk of the possibility that Judge Kavenaugh might be fortunate enough to be able to prove an alibi.
The fact that there is a political conspiracy in place against constitutional, limited, government - and against judges such as Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh who stand for it - hales back much further back in time than the “vast right wing conspiracy . . . against my husband since the day he announced for president” claim made by Hillary Clinton in twenty years ago. That has been undeniable for so long that it hales back almost to the time referred to in Mrs. Ford’s complaint against Judge Kavenaugh.

Even by Ms. Ford's own telling, in the putative incident ‘way back in 1982:

nobody was killed.

the prestige of the US government was not compromised by the brutalizing and murder of a US ambassador.

nobody spent a night in terror and fighting for their lives without support from their U.S. government employer.

And the truth of the charges will never be known.
So the natural question for Senator Feinstein, is

“What difference, at this point, does it make?"

WHY CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD’S PREP SCHOOL YEARBOOK GOT SCRUBBED:
Page upon page shows Holton Arms Faculty Approved Racism, underage Drinking & underage Promiscuity

PROGRESSIVE HOLTON ARMS FACULTY APPROVED SEXUAL PROMISCUITY-
the Holton girls mention their male conquests with great pride: “No longer confining ourselves to the walls of Landon and Prep, we plunged into the waters of St John and Gonzaga with much success.”

.....pg. 260, shows racy images, including three Holton minors dressed provocatively as Playboy bunnies. The caption states: “Beach week culminated the year for those of us lucky enough to go, we were able to release all those troubling inhibitions of the past year. While dancing in the
middle of coastal Highway, Holton Arms student Ann and friends picked up men who passed out in their apartment......”

(hat tip rashputin) ......Ford is so typical of the liberal/progressive scum that make up the backbone of the Democrat party.
Wallowing in “White Privilege” all their lives....... and then becoming “Victims” when it suits their agenda.

The “dregs and deplorables” not well-off enough to go to exclusive private schools, staunch conservatives,
and others who don’t ‘get with the prog program’ are nothing but jokes to them ...... and handy targets to feed off of.

ANALYSIS Obama is still dining out handsomely as the community organizer victim, the Halfrican who rose from poverty to be president.

Chances are Ford saw a money-making opportunity: she’d lie like hell, say Brett is a sex maniac.....and cash-in.

There’s money to be made doing speeches to Democrat women’s groups, personal appearances, eternal seminars on abused women,
maybe an abused woman foundation, definitely a tax-exempt non-profit, appointments to boards........
and so on and so forth, ad infinitum, ad nauseaum.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.