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.
This isn’t a matter of “credibility,” though that’s how the left is going to try to play it. It isn’t about “always believing the woman” (an idiotic concept). It’s about provable or disprovable evidence. Absent that, the Senate must do what it would have done had the accusation not been made.
Here’s why. The Senate has a Constitutional obligation to confirm or reject this[*] appointment. While every Senator is free to use whatever criteria he or she chooses in determining how to vote, the Senate as a whole has a duty to uphold the Constitution — and that means that the Senate can’t act in such a way as to make fulfilling that Constitutional duty impossible for all future Senates and all future confirmations.
As matters now stand, we have an accusation so vague as to be impossible to prove or disprove: no time, no place, no details before or after, no contemporaneous reporting, no witnesses. Absent further details, it is not possible to establish the veracity of the claims made against Kavanaugh. Mere credibility is inadequate: whatever one thinks of Ms. Ford’s claims, the reality is that there is no way to determine whether she is being truthful and correct, truthful but mistaken, or simply dishonest.
If the Senate rejects Kavanaugh on this basis, it has abrogated its responsibility and authority to confirm future justices. It will have set a precedent that allows any sufficiently compelling fraud to cast the deciding vote in confirmation hearings. This is true whether or not Ms. Ford is being honest.
Any Senator who would have voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh prior to this allegation, but who opposes his confirmation now, is, though acting within his or her right as a Senator, nonetheless betraying the institution and contributing to the decline of what was once a dignified deliberative body.
Constitutional governance must not be surrendered to the mob — not even to a mob of one.
[* As Al Sparks has correctly pointed out in #44, no specific nominee must be confirmed or rejected. However, it does remain the Senate’s Constitutional duty to confirm or reject nominees.]Published in