Why the Brett Kavanaugh Smear?

Why the Brett Kavanaugh Smear? By John Hinderaker.

Why are the Democrats so determined to block Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court? Realistically, he is the most moderate nominee they are likely to see from the Trump administration. If his nomination fails, the president will most likely appoint Amy Barrett, who is secure against #MeToo allegations and is both more conservative and younger than Kavanaugh. So what is the point?…

Brett Kavanaugh enjoys one of the most spotless reputations of anyone in American public life. He has been enthusiastically endorsed by those who have known him all his life — by girls he knew in high school and college, by judges he has served with, by professors and students and Harvard and Yale law schools, by judges who have worked with him, by his judicial clerks – most of whom have been women — by the American Bar Association, by sitting Supreme Court justices. In short, everyone who has ever known or dealt with Brett Kavanaugh endorses him.

I think that Judge Kavanaugh’s pristine reputation is one reason why the Democrats have unleashed against him a smear campaign unparalleled in American history.

This is the message they are trying to send:

If we can do this to the Boy Scout Brett Kavanaugh, we can do it to anyone. Are you thinking of serving in a Republican administration? Or accepting an appointment to the federal judiciary from a Republican president? Think twice, and then think again.

Because our smear machine will reach back to middle school if necessary. If we can’t find any dirt on you, we will manufacture some. There is no depth to which we will not stoop, and your honesty, integrity and spotless reputation are no match for our control over the media and our determination to dredge up ridiculous allegations against anyone who stands in our way.

Really, the more ridiculous the better. If we can accuse Brett Kavanaugh, one of the most respected lawyers and judges in America, of gang rape, we can accuse anyone of anything! And our insane accusations will dominate the news. …

Republicans, beware — if this can happen to Brett Kavanaugh, it can happen to anyone. You’d better go quietly and cede power to us.

Smirking liars?

UPDATE: Small world: Christine Blasey Ford’s Brother Worked With Jill Strzok


hat-tip Scott of the Pacific

Kavanaugh Hearing Was The Democrats’ Worst Nightmare

Kavanaugh Hearing Was The Democrats’ Worst Nightmare, by Mark Davis.

In recent years, the main conservative thirsts have been for a more muscular and unapologetic conservatism and for the bright light of truth to be directed onto the darkest habits of modern leftists.

The election of Donald Trump has propelled us down a road featuring satisfying helpings of both. But on one stunning day, September 27, 2018, there arose Republican resolve like nothing in recent memory. The accompanying reputational suicide of several key Democrats tied a bow around a historic day for clarity.

The occasion was the totally unnecessary session of testimony by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and his main accuser of sexual misbehavior, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. The occasion was needless because Dr. Ford’s story in no way rises to the level of credibility to dislodge the nomination. No decent society smears people for life based on high school misbehavior, so even if the wholly unsupported story were true, there would have been a strong argument against its relevancy today. …

As soon as Judge Kavanaugh completed his opening statement, it became clear what the afternoon matinee would contain: Republicans showing more spine than they have in years, accompanied by Democrats making total asses of themselves.

This is what Kavanaugh’s riveting certitude did to both sides. It energized Republicans to solidly back the judge, and additionally inspired them to call out committee Democrats for the shameful scam they have deployed to poison the nomination process. …

No matter how the judge’s fate unfolds, history will well remember Lindsey Graham’s fiery rebuke of Democrats for the behavior they have displayed for decades. …

Compactly contained within one day witnessed by millions, we saw Democrat behavior so unhinged and repulsive that Republicans finally came out of their shells and called them on it. It was glorious.

The confirmation of Kavanaugh is now a moral necessity—so that a good man’s reputation can be restored, rules of basic decency upheld, and viciously craven political tactics dealt the death blow they deserve.

hat-tip Barry Corke

Queensland senator Fraser Anning banned from Facebook

Queensland senator Fraser Anning banned from Facebook, by Richard Ferguson.

An Australian Senator has been removed from Facebook after a litany of complaints were made about an anti-Muslim video he published.

Queensland Senator Fraser Anning had his Facebook page unpublished today …

The senator, who switched to Bob Katter’s party after originally representing Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, published a video on his social media feeds yesterday which again called for an end to Muslim immigration.

“I have been banned for highlighting issues that the major parties didn’t have the stomach for. Facebook gives no reason other than you do not meet their community standards,” Senator Anning said, issuing a media release titled ‘Senator Anning Becomes Latest Victim of the Zuck’.

Foreign interference in Australian democracy:

“Because of this in shutting down my Facebook page, a foreign corporation isn’t just shutting down free speech it is attacking Australian Democracy.”

Another day, another non-PC voice silenced.

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Kavanaugh vote postponed for one week: Trump orders FBI investigation of Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh vote postponed for one week: Trump orders FBI investigation of Kavanaugh, by Alex Pappas.

President Trump on Friday ordered the FBI to conduct a limited “supplemental” background investigation into the allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. …

Trump’s order came after several undecided senators whose votes are needed to confirm Kavanaugh called for a weeklong FBI probe before a floor vote.

The Senate had been expected to begin debate on Kavanaugh’s nomination this weekend, but after Trump’s order, McConnell adjourned the body until Monday. A potential confirmation vote may not come until late next week, next weekend or perhaps the week of Oct. 7.

Democrats want to delay the vote until after the mid-terms:

An attorney for Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford, Debra S. Katz, said in a statement Friday that Ford “welcomes this step in the process.” But Katz took issue with the one-week limit, saying no “artificial limits as to time or scope should be imposed on this investigation.” …

The U.S. Capitol Police said they arrested 88 people on Friday for unlawfully demonstrating in Senate office buildings as they were protesting Kavanaugh’s nomination. Police said 81 people were arrested Friday morning outside a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting in the Dirksen office building.

Flake Flakes Out

Flake Flakes Out, by John Hinderaker.

Earlier this morning, Senator Jeff Flake said he would vote Yes on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation. But when the Judiciary Committee met and voted, he threw a curve ball: Flake voted Yes and the nomination went to the Senate floor on an 11-10 party line vote. But Flake said he will ultimately vote for the nomination only if there is a brief delay to permit another FBI investigation. Lisa Murkowski followed up by telling an interviewer she supports Flake’s call for a delay. …

Delay poses two risks: more lunatics could come out of the weeds, like Julie what’s-her-name. How soon we forget. Or pressure could continue to build on any senators who are still wavering. Neither risk can be entirely discounted, but the Democrats have been frantically searching for women willing to tell tall tales for weeks now. …

They’ve agreed to a one-week delay. Too bad, but it won’t do any harm as long as Republican senators pay no attention to the hysteria to which they will be subjected for the next seven days.

Prosecutor tells wavering senators she wouldn’t charge Kavanaugh

Prosecutor tells wavering senators she wouldn’t charge Kavanaugh, by Brooke Singman.

The sex-crimes prosecutor Republicans hired to question Brett Kavanaugh and accuser Christine Blasey Ford at Thursday’s hearing told senators the case would not hold up in a courtroom …

The prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell, spoke at an overnight meeting where all 51 Republican senators were present, two people briefed on the session said.

“Mitchell spelled it out and was clear with senators that she could not take this anywhere near a courtroom,” one source told Fox News. She told them she would not charge the Supreme Court nominee and reportedly said she wouldn’t even seek a search warrant.

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific, Charles

Women Screaming At Flake In Elevator Were Soros-funded Astroturfed Activist Leaders! — Not Victims

Women Screaming At Flake In Elevator Were Soros-funded Astroturfed Activist Leaders! — Not Victims, By Jim Hoft.

Earlier in the day on Friday Senator Jeff Flake announced he would vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh out of the Judiciary Committee. Then he got cornered in an elevator by a screaming leftist for 4 minutes.

About an hour later and after several private talks with Democrats Jeff Flake came out and announced he would only vote for Brett Kavanaugh if an investigation continued on the man for another week.

This was exactly what Democrats were hoping for!

Now this…

The women who were screaming at Senator Jeff Flake in the elevator are Soros-funded astroturfed activists.

Their names are Maria Gallagher and Ana Maria Archila.

Flake and Republicans got played.

They celebrated after Flake caved!

Soros-funded activists triumph again.

hat-tip Scott of the Pacific

Women confront Jeff Flake on Brett Kavanaugh support

Women confront Jeff Flake on Brett Kavanaugh support, by AP.

Moments after pivotal US senator Jeff Flake announced his support for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh … two women cornered Senator Flake as he got on an elevator …

“Look at me and tell me that it doesn’t matter what happened to me,” said 23-year-old Maria Gallagher. …

Senator Flake was later asked whether the elevator confrontation swayed him. “I can say this whole process has affected all of us,” he said. “I can’t pinpoint anything to say this is what caused me to come today to say let’s postpone.” …

Senator Flake was on his way to the morning hearing when the two women, both affiliated with advocacy groups, told him they were sexual assault survivors. …

Ms Archila, 39, appeared to block Senator Flake from closing the elevator door. Then Ms Gallagher said: “I was sexually assaulted and nobody believed me. I didn’t tell anyone, and you’re telling all women that they don’t matter, that they should just stay quiet because if they tell you what happened to them you are going to ignore them.

“That’s what happened to me, and that’s what you are telling all women in America, that they don’t matter,” she said through tears.

She begged Senator Flake to look her in the eye. “Don’t look away from me,” she said. Senator Flake, cornered in the elevator, shifted between looking at them and looking down. He said “thank you”, but didn’t respond to questions on whether he believed Dr Ford’s testimony. …

Speaking to the AP by phone after the confrontation, Ms Gallagher said she didn’t intend to tell Senator Flake about her assault — she had never told anyone before. “But I saw him, and I got really angry,” she said.

Ms Archila told the AP that she was sexually assaulted when she was five years old by a teenager when she and her family lived in Colombia. She said she didn’t tell anyone before this week.

Her own account is contradictory.

Again, the left is spinning this as a brave choice between supporting women and making up for the centuries — millennia — of unfair treatment of women, or not believing survivors.

The Fuggernaught and the Marriage Gap

The Fuggernaught and the Marriage Gap, by The Audacious Epigone.

Well, the fuggernaught has stumbled onto a successful method of counterfeiting accusations against demographic enemies in the Roy Moore and Brett Kavanaugh cases. Fabricated sexual misconduct allegations that are recent as susceptible to all kinds of new technological innovations that make them disprovable (ie the Duke Lacrosse lie, the UVA rape hoax, etc). But old ones existing before the age of ubiquitous digital time stamps? Those are easy to lie about and almost impossible to positively refute.

Guilty until proven innocent, with no repercussions to the accuser even if the thing is mendacious slander from top to bottom. …

Even if the Stupid Party wins this battle and Kavanaugh is confirmed, it’s a Pyrrhic victory of sorts, the only kind of victory cuckservatives ever win. The fuggernaught is the real winner here. It used the tactic with Roy Moore and it worked, they’re using it with Kavanaugh and it’s almost done the trick, and they’ll use it again and again in the future with varying degrees of success and no drawbacks.

They also win with it in the same way they’re winning with the never-ending Fake Russia Story. Yeah, the whole thing is laughably false, but it is having the effect of scaring people away from working for the Trump administration, and this new accuse-from-the-hip will scare people on the right more generally from wanting to do anything in an official capacity.

Parenthetically, the putative war on women is really a war on marriage. One of Steve Sailer’s many great insights over the years has been noting how the much talked about gender gap is reliably dwarfed by the much larger marriage gap.

So it is with the Kavanaugh calumny. The following graphs show firstly the percentages of respondents, by sex and marital status, who support Kavanaugh’s nomination with “don’t know” responses excluded, and secondly the gap in support by sex and then the gaps in support between married and never-married members of the same sex (N = 19,561):

… The imposition of same-sex marriage wasn’t just gratuitous leftism, it had a very precise and very predictable political purpose.

The Supreme Yacht Club

The Supreme Yacht Club, by Joe Bob Briggs.

Let’s start with the makeup of our current Supreme Court, focusing on how well they represent all the various legal and educational traditions of our diverse nation:

Chief Justice Roberts: Harvard Law by way of Harvard undergrad.

Justice Thomas: Harvard Law by way of Holy Cross.

Justice Ginsburg: Columbia Law by way of both Harvard and Cornell.

Justice Breyer: Harvard Law by way of Stanford and Oxford, with a stint as a teacher at…Harvard Law.

Justice Alito: Yale Law by way of Princeton.

Justice Sotomayor: Yale Law by way of Princeton.

Justice Kagan: Harvard Law by way of Princeton, Worcester, and Oxford.

Justice Gorsuch: Harvard Law by way of Columbia (and, going back further, by way of Georgetown Prep—Donald Trump has a soft spot in his heart for his fellow Eastern prep-school men of the people).

So the score so far would be:

Ivy League 16, all other American schools 3.

American schools on the East Coast 18, all other regions 1.

In all our conversations about diversity, does anyone ever point out that our Supreme Court is the most privileged class-based institution that we’ve managed to create over the past 220 years, an Old Boys Network so entrenched that they’ve figured out ways to let women and minorities join in while remaining an Old Boys Network?

If you are a law student enrolling today at, say, the University of North Dakota, you have to know that at no time in your lifetime will you become eligible to serve on the Supreme Court, no matter how hard you study, no matter how deeply you comprehend the law, no matter how good you are in the courtroom, no matter how many lives you save or disputes you resolve with your reasoned, literate appellate briefs. But we really don’t have to go to that extreme example. You’ve got no chance even if you’re attending the law schools of Duke, Northwestern, the University of Texas, or UCLA, to pick just four examples of superb schools that are considered out of the loop. If you’re like Abraham Lincoln, and you’re a virtually self-taught lawyer who passes the bar on your own initiative, you’ve got about as much chance of putting on any kind of judicial robe as Stormy Daniels.

Result: You have the most privileged, elitist, sheltered people in America passing judgment on the least privileged and the most vulnerable, essentially telling them how to behave.

The Kavanaugh Farce Escalates

The Kavanaugh Farce Escalates, by Christopher DeGroot.

On Sunday, The New Yorker published an article by Jane Meyer and Ronan Farrow that led the farce to take on more ridiculous proportions: …

The woman at the center of the story, Deborah Ramirez, who is 53, … she spent years working for an organization that supports victims of domestic violence. …

In her initial conversations with ‘The New Yorker,’ she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. …

What Meyer and Farrow don’t tell us is that before The New Yorker spoke with Ramirez, The New York Times had already heard her story, but since they couldn’t find anyone to substantiate it, despite doing dozens of interviews, the paper chose not to “give a voice to her silence,” as cant peddlers would put it. …

Like Christine Ford, Deborah Ramirez has a background in social science, a field that breeds pathology and resentment. One is reminded of Karl Kraus’ quip about psychoanalysis: that it is itself the illness which it purports to cure.

Still, “after six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney,” Ramirez has a different story. To be sure, like the perception that it reflects, human memory is notoriously biased and unreliable. When it comes to the mind, nothing is more common than believing things because they suit one’s interests, selectively interpreting both the past and the present to that egoistic end. …

Here women’s greater conformity, greater neuroticism, and characteristic hysteria are quite baleful. In many cases, all a woman has to do is learn of other women’s “stories” — or speak to her girlfriends, or mother, or sister, or the invariably feminist university bureaucrat — and suddenly she believes that she too was raped or sexually harassed. …

The most telling sign that Ramirez is not credible is the phrase “consulting with her attorney.” It was this that made Ramirez confident in her recollections. What might motivate an attorney to inspire the woman’s confidence? To start, how about $800 or more an hour, while knowing, with an eye to Christine Ford’s GoFundMe account, that the huge legal fees would probably be funded by the contributions of a great many vengeful pseudo-puritans?

What might motivate women like Ford and Ramirez to “come forward”? How about the power that comes with the incalculable moral capital one obtains from doing so? How about sympathy, attention, fame, speaking gigs on television and elsewhere, book deals, and more? Notice that, as if on cue, Anita Hill has emerged to offer her two cents on “How to Get the Kavanaugh Hearings Right.”

US Supremes: The next ugly fight is impeachment

US Supremes: The next ugly fight is impeachment, by Mike Allen.

In a foreshadowing of how much uglier U.S. politics could get, top Democratic operatives are already talking about impeachment of Brett Kavanaugh as a 2020 campaign issue if he gets confirmed to the Supreme Court. …

A well-known Democratic strategist says the “only question is who calls for it first.” …

A veteran Republican close to Senate leaders and the White House: “Impeachment of Trump and Kav will be an animating issue on both sides.” …

The N.Y. Times’ Jeremy Peters tweeted: “[W]hat I saw today was a fury between members of opposite parties that is as profound and unnerving as I’ve ever seen. They’re not faking it.”

Germany: Cologne braces for protests as Erdogan opens mega mosque

Germany: Cologne braces for protests as Erdogan opens mega mosque, by Michelle Fitzpatrick.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is set to open one of Europe’s largest mosques in Cologne on Saturday as he wraps up a controversial visit to Germany, with police deploying in force amid planned protests.

The sheer size of the building, designed to resemble a flower bud opening, and its two towering minarets has disgruntled some locals, triggering occasional protests.

The Turkish-Islamic Union of the Institute for Religion (Ditib) that commissioned the glass and cement structure is itself not without controversy.

The group runs hundreds of mosques across Germany, and its imams are paid by the Turkish state.

Known for its close ties to Ankara, it has increasingly come under scrutiny with some of its members suspected of spying on Turkish dissidents living in Germany.

Video shows border wall construction underway in Texas

Video shows border wall construction underway in Texas, by Aris Foley.

The video published by the El Paso Times shows construction beginning to replace existing fencing with a wall in Chihuahuita, El Paso’s oldest neighborhood.

The wall, construction for which began last Saturday, is set to run from Chihuahuita and continue east for four miles. …

U.S. Customs and Border Protection said in a news release … “In fiscal year 2017, El Paso Sector apprehended 25,193 illegal aliens, seized 34,189 pounds of marijuana and 140 pounds of cocaine,” the release continued. “Additionally during that fiscal year, there were 54 assaults against El Paso Sector agents.” …

Trump lashed out at Congress earlier this month over a lack of funding for his border wall in a recently passed spending bill.

“I want to know, where is the money for Border Security and the WALL in this ridiculous Spending Bill, and where will it come from after the Midterms?” Trump tweeted. “Dems are obstructing Law Enforcement and Border Security. REPUBLICANS MUST FINALLY GET TOUGH!”

Political party vying in Quebec election promises to kick out immigrants who fail ‘values test’

Political party vying in Quebec election promises to kick out immigrants who fail ‘values test’, by Amanda Coletta.

Days before a provincial election in Quebec, a center-right party promising to slash immigration and to kick out all immigrants who fail tests of “values” and the French language is in a dead heat with the incumbent Liberals who have governed the province for most of the past 15 years. …

This year’s contest will be the first in nearly six decades where the “national question” – whether French-speaking Quebec should separate from the rest of Canada – is not a campaign issue. But those bitter independence battles have morphed into acrimonious fights over immigration and perceived threats to Quebec’s francophone identity. …

In 2014, the ruling Parti Quebecois failed to pass a “Charter of Values,” which would have banned the wearing or display of “conspicuous” religious symbols, such as turbans and hijabs, in the public service, though thousands of crosses were “grandfathered” in. It lost the election to the Liberals who opposed the charter.

But then the Liberals waded into similar territory when they passed a law banning face coverings for those receiving public services in 2017.

Cultural battles in Quebec have long been very fierce and forthright.

The background to this is that due to immigration the French-speaking European-background Quebecois are losing population share, and on current trends will become a minority in 2035.

hat-tip Stephen Neil