Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
#HimToo? Call Wavering Senators’ Bluff
If Sen. Flake, who the careful John Hinderaker now calls “traitor,” truly believes Judge Kavanaugh’s 11th -hour Democrat accuser, he will immediately call for the judge’s impeachment. If Flake and the abortion-on-demand supporters, Senators Collins and Murkowski, believe a word of the accusation against Judge Kavanaugh, if they even really believe the allegation is serious, then they will also immediately hold a press conference demanding the impeachment of Justice Clarence Thomas. They will do no such thing because they believe none of this.
As John Hinderaker explains:
“Traitor” is normally considered a harsh word, but it is the only printable thing I have called “Republican” Senator Jeff Flake since he announced, a few hours ago, that he is “not comfortable voting yes” on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. His concern is the ridiculously stale allegation by Democrat professor Christine Ford that Kavanaugh groped her and tried to kiss her at a party when they were both high school students more than 30 years ago. You might reasonably think this is a joke. Unfortunately not.
Kavanaugh unequivocally denies Ford’s allegation, and the only witness to the event (per Ford), Mark Judge, says “It’s just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way.” I think Ms. Ford is pretty obviously lying (don’t get me started on the friendly “lie detector test” that the Washington Post says she passed), or, on the most charitable explanation, possibly has Brett Kavanaugh confused with someone else.
There is no honest way to claim “concern” and seek to end Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination, outright or by the deceit of “need more time to examine evidence,” without simultaneously seeking the suspension of the judge from his appellate court duties, pending the outcome of impeachment proceedings. Indeed, Senator Grassley should force the issue by first calling a committee vote to refer the Anita Hill testimony to the House with a recommendation of opening impeachment proceedings. Let us see where Flake and Senators Collins and Murkowski really stand.
Follow that vote, before the cameras, with a second vote on a motion to refer Prof. Ford’s letter, and all public accounts of the allegations, to the House for immediate impeachment proceedings against Judge Kavanaugh. Again, force Flake, and every (other) Republican, to fully own or fully repudiate this character assassination.
Senator Grassley should tweet CNN’s (!) clip of Clarence Thomas’s crowning moment before the same committee, when he vehemently denied the Anita Hill allegations and concluded, “this is a high-tech lynching.” The Democrats have since gotten some insulation with Sens. Booker and Harris, so the same phrase cannot be repeated. But it would be powerful to tweet the video and say: “The Democrats smeared an honorable man before, and are at it again.”
If Senator Grassley won’t go there, President Trump must. He must also remind everyone that Judge Amy Coney Barrett was interviewed, and voted on, by all but two current Senators, and is his non-negotiable next pick for the next Supreme Court vacancy. That would put steel in the squishy Senators’ spines, and either push Flake back on the conservative side, or cause him to permanently discredit himself, with all serious people.
Meanwhile, Rep. McSally must speak out now. If she agrees with Flake, she must lead the charge, introducing the motion to begin impeachment proceedings against Judge Kavanaugh. If she disagrees, she must call out Flake for colluding with Democrats to degrade the power of real #MeToo claims with malicious political mendacity.
Either way, McSally gets to be the voice of conscience in Congress. Silence will bring a wave of Democrat attack ads to which she will have to respond. The fighter pilot knows OODA and needs to get inside her Senate campaign opponent Rep. Sinema’s decision loop.
Published in Culture
When that whole thing blew up, I think we were camping and I didn’t follow it closely. Also, I was like 11 years old at the time. So I will cheerfully defer to you wrt the details of the Anita Hill thing. If anything I was sloppy with my wording because I’ve never gone back and looked at the details.
I second this. I’m willing to bet that Ford genuinely believes the story she’s telling. If you understand how human memory works, you also understand that it is terrible.
Really? Was in common in your high school for boys to lock women in a bedroom, climb on top of them, and then try to take their clothes off against their will? That was the norm for you?
These are felonies she’s accused Kavanaugh of though, correct? If so, those participating in this accusation are aiding/abetting not just the attempted ruination of a career but also accusing an officer of the court of attempted felonies.
It’s possible someone assaulted Ms. Ford. It may even have been Judge Kavanaugh. For all we know, he may have raped her, sang her some show tunes, and left her, stark naked, in a public park.
But we have no business believing Kavanaugh did any of this. The evidence is thin, and the partisanship is thicker than Googly-eyes Cortez.
What is federal law regarding sexual harassment (as opposed to criminal assault)? My impression is it ends up in court as a civil suit, and one reason it’s so effectively pursued in the courts is the lower standard involved (preponderance of the evidence as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt).
I don’t think sexual harrassment alone is a criminal offense.
Fred Cole: Really? Was in common in your high school for boys to lock women in a bedroom, climb on top of them, and then try to take their clothes off against their will? That was the norm for you?
You know, I think we are quibbling over verbs. In telling the story of any attempted seduction or sexual exploration from my high school days, I probably wouldn’t relate it using “locked in,” “pushed,” “jumped,” “stumbled,” and so on to describe the incident (unless it was to my parents). I continue to find it puzzling that she was “locked in,” when all bedroom locks are on the inside far as I know, that these allegedly drunken boys had the time to locate a source of music in an unfamiliar room and turn the volume way up, that she knew they stumbled down the stairs when they returned to the party even though she had locked herself in a bathroom, sobbing. And so on.
But yes, Fred, it was not unusual for a boy in my high school to tug at a girl’s bra and try to remove it, to attempt to roll atop her, or to take other liberties I’m too bashful to describe, while parked or partying. In those olden days, before high schools handed out birth control to students and prior to learning in a classroom how to put a condom on a cucumber, there was only the remotest chance a boy would succeed. Still, it was the “norm” for them to try. BTW, my high school was in a small midwest farming community, not the mean streets of an urban center, and those were the 1950s.
I’m so twisted, matter of fact, that when rumors of Ms. Ford’s tale first emerged I felt almost relieved. I saw most of the four-day hearings and the judge seemed such a saintly, goody-two-shoes fella I worried whether he had the life experience for his work.
I’m finished now. And so, I fear, is Judge Kavanaugh.
If so, that would be a damn shame. That would mean we’ve crossed a Rubicon of sorts, where alleged and unproven teenage misbehavior from 35 years ago is enough “evidence” to destroy a man. For make no mistake, if Kavanaugh is kept off the Supreme Court over this allegation, how can he now go back to his seat on the D.C. Circuit? He will be done, forced to resign in disgrace, his daughters will have a cloud over them a they enter high school, this would ruin this man. I hope he stands firm and his character witnesses stay true.
If Prof. Ford’s allegations are not proven, will she face any questioning at all? Did Anita Hill face any real consequences for what she tried to do?
Fear not. Judge Kavanaugh is not finished and will be confirmed. The GOP is just keeping Flake and Corker in the boat by not rejecting this nonsense out of hand.
Don’t look now … but Christine Blasey Ford may not even publicly testify before the Senate Judiciary.
That just means they can keep everything at the level of vague accuastions without ever having to prove anything. It’s all a cynical political smear.
I think it is good old character assassination. If you look it up on Wiki, it pretty much describes what is going on. They are looking to ruin him. It is not about what happened in high school; that is a red herring.
There really cannot be a lot to testify about. It is he/she arguing as adults over what they remember as teens.
And people eat this up like it is an episode of Survivor.
She has a lot to gain by sinking his nomination. I say the next one, no hearings, straight to the floor to vote.
Remember also, RGB said a short time ago, the hearings were clearly partisian on both sides. She saw what the Dems were doing too.
Really? What’s the police report say.
There is no police report…
I’m pretty sure that was his point.