President Trump’s predecessor famously justified his high-handed governing style by gloating, “Elections have consequences.” That axiom, it seems, doesn’t apply when Republicans win. According to exit polls, 75 percent of those who cast ballots for Trump in 2016 said Supreme Court appointments were “either the most important or an important factor” in their votes. In other words, they put Trump in the White House and Republicans in charge of the Senate so the high court would abide by the Constitution. By smearing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, the Democrats have in effect told the voters to drop dead.
The voters unambiguously signaled that they want the kind of justices on the Supreme Court that Trump has nominated rather than the leftwing ideologues whom Hillary Clinton would certainly have put forward. Nor do the Democrats have any legitimate reason to resist Kavanaugh’s confirmation. By every objective standard, he is one of the most qualified judges ever to be nominated by any president. And the calm, thoughtful manner with which he responded to the antics of Democratic Senators during his confirmation hearings further bolstered his credibility. This left them with only one way to frustrate the will of the voters.
Enter Christine Blasey Ford and her hopelessly implausible tale of sexual misconduct allegedly committed by Kavanaugh 36 years ago. Repeated claims by the Democrats and the legacy media notwithstanding, Ford’s accusation isn’t remotely “credible.” Everything about this fable, from the underhanded way Senator Dianne Feinstein used it to delay the confirmation process to the increasingly unreasonable demands of Ford’s lawyers, gives off the unmistakable odor of prevarication. Nor has the absence of corroborating evidence done anything to neutralize the stench. Feinstein herself admitted, “Now, I can’t say everything is truthful.”
Nonetheless, Feinstein and her accomplices on the Judiciary Committee have demanded an FBI investigation, knowing that no such inquiry is possible. Never mind that Judge Kavanaugh has already gone through six FBI background checks, how is any law enforcement agency expected to investigate an incident if Ford can’t tell them when or where it happened? What can they do if she can’t tell them how she arrived at the scene of the crime or how she got home after it was allegedly committed? Yet the Democrats still insist that Ford’s accusations are credible. New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has shared her razor-like reasoning:
I believe Dr. Blasey Ford because she’s telling the truth. And you know it by her story; you know it by the fact that she told her therapist five years ago. It was documented at the time; we have the therapist’s notes. She told her husband. This is a trauma she’s been dealing with her whole life. She doesn’t want to be in a bedroom that doesn’t have two doors; people knew that about her a long time ago.
OK … Setting aside the circular reasoning for the moment, let’s look at Gillibrand’s claim about the therapist. Ford does, in fact, seem to have told a version of this story during couples therapy in 2012. Unfortunately for her credibility, the therapist’s notes indicate that the tale has evolved during the subsequent years. As the Washington Post reported when Ford first went public, she told the therapist there were four boys in the room. Ford said that was a transcription error and that there were four boys in the house but only two in the room. It turns out that this was also untrue. As a statement released Sunday from the Judiciary Committee points out:
In the course of the Committee’s investigation, it learned the identities of the four other individuals Dr. Ford claimed were at the party when the incident took place. They were not all boys, as Dr. Ford apparently told her therapist and the Washington Post. The four individuals Dr. Ford claimed attended the party were Judge Kavanaugh, Mr. Judge, Mr. Patrick J. Smyth, and Ms. Leland Ingham Keyser.
The Committee requested interviews with each. Kavanaugh submitted to an interview, of course, and reiterated his denial of Ford’s allegations. Judge submitted a statement through his attorney denying any knowledge of the party. Smyth also provided a statement through counsel denying knowledge of the party. Keyser stated through her lawyer that she “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present.” Now, the only person who hasn’t made a statement under oath is Ford, but she will get an opportunity to do so Thursday, according to another Committee announcement:
The Senate Judiciary Committee will hear the testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford on Thursday, September 27. This will occur as a continuation of the hearing to consider the nomination of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Following Dr. Ford’s testimony, Judge Kavanaugh will appear again before the committee.
Meanwhile, presumably because Ford’s story is collapsing, the Democrats and the media have conveniently produced another Kavanaugh “victim.” The New Yorker reports that Deborah Ramirez claims Kavanaugh “exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party” when they were both at Yale. Like Ford, she never reported this to the authorities during the intervening 35 years but is now calling for the FBI to investigate the incident. Also like Ford, Ramirez is a SJW who “works toward human rights, social justice, and social change.” Predictably, people who knew both her and Kavanaugh have never heard about the incident until now:
He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it — and we did not.
It’s blindingly obvious that the Democrats are bent on destroying Kavanaugh, and nullifying the votes of millions of Americans who elected President Trump and the Republican Senate precisely because they would put such justices on the Supreme Court. These voters are becoming increasingly frustrated by Democratic dirty tricks and the inability of Senate Republicans to put a halt to them. As Ann Coulter Tweeted: “Hey, Mitch McConnell! Here’s OUR deadline: Confirm this fine judge by sundown Monday or we’re not voting Republican this fall.” It should be obvious that this would be a mistake of monumental proportions.
Anyone who believes that the way to punish RINOs is to give Congress back to the Democrats needs to stop skipping her medication. The sane strategy for getting rid of weak Republicans is to replace them with strong Republicans. What we are seeing now is nothing compared to the crimes against democracy the Democrats will commit if they capture a majority in either house of Congress. The only way to stop them is show up at the polls in November and crush them like the insects they are. Then President Trump and the Republican Congress can get back to the business of carrying out the will of the voters as expressed in 2016.