And So Judge Kavanaugh Accedes to the Bench
by John Lawrence, October 6, 2018
It was a foregone conclusion. He said. She said with no corroboration. If the Judge had done these things five years ago and there was corroboration, then he may have been tried and convicted, but the time frame when the event undoubtedly occurred was ancient history. Some women are outraged, but probably not enough to damage the Republican party's fortunes. The Trump base, or the 'silent majority' as Nixon called them, have evidently been 'energized' by the recent proceedings. The upcoming mid term elections will probably tell the story. Were enough independent voters outraged enough to vote for Democrats?
Kavanaugh proclaimed, "I am innocent," and he surely was in terms of the law. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and there was no way Kavanaugh was going to be proven guilty. Despite multiple allegations and a furious hue and cry, the brou ha ha was in the final analysis just a media spectacle. It sure raised ratings and gave Judge Kavanaugh, albeit unfortunately for him, a national stage. Now he can get down to the business of screwing leftist women politically and taking away their rights.
It all comes down to the numbers. Are there enough votes to repudiate the Republicans at the polls? The problem with the #MeToo movement is that most of these women are "coming forward" as opposed to "going to the police" at the time the incidents occurred. Maybe that will change from now on. It's one thing to get a Les Moonves removed from his CEOship. It's another to get a bunch of lawyers to convict one of their own own based on the court of public opinion.
Unless there is corroborating evidence, the powers that be are not going to believe someone's story no matter how sincere and convincing. They believed Monica Levinsky because she had DNA evidence that it was Bill Clinton. With Bill Cosby, there was no corroborating evidence, but he is a black man so that wasn't as necessary. The Washington Post reported: "The [Cosby] case lacks physical evidence, so much of the prosecution’s presentation to jurors will rest on her [Andrea Costand's] testimony." Another high tech lynching? However, a jury of someone's peers made the decision. A jury need not decide based on corroborating evidence. Evidently, it was enough that a bunch of women came forward with similar stories about Cosby. And did I mention: he's black.
A jury may well have convicted Judge Kavanaugh although the statute of limitations had obviously run out so no jury could possibly have. True, not as many women came forward as in the Cosby case. Christine Blasey Ford was a credible witness, but the incident took place too long ago and there was not enough corroboration. It was a "youthful indiscretion" as politician Henry Hyde declared when he was caught having committed adultery. He was one of the chief accuser's of Bill Clinton.
While Hyde was spearheading the impeachment of President Clinton in the Monica Lewinsky affair, it was revealed that Hyde himself had conducted an extramarital sexual affair with Cherie Snodgrass who was also married. Hyde admitted to the affair and attributed the relationship as a mere "youthful indiscretion". He was 41 years old and married when the affair occurred. Hyde said the affair ended when Snodgrass' husband confronted Mrs. Hyde. At the time, Snodgrass was also married and had three children.
And so sex is a potent tool in the political arena which is responsible for much hypocrisy. Oh what fools we mortals be. And so Kavanaugh accedes to the bench along with "that Thomas" as Anita Hill called him. Lesson to women: document any physical assaults, rapes or attempted rapes.
